Previous 11 / 24 Next

Civil Appeal No.188 of 2019 11 . (i) The land in question was transferred in favour of Respondent No.1 as far back as 2014 by way of a written family settlement which was duly implemented in all revenue records; (ii) It is not the case of Respondent No.1 that he did not know about such transfer or that such transfer was undertaken without his knowledge or consent; (iii) By reason of the family settlement and its implementation in the revenue records, the name of Respondent No.1 appeared and continues to appear in all records as the owner of the property; (iv) The proprietary rights, title and interest in such property clearly vest in him; (v) A part of such land was admittedly acquired by the Government of Sindh and there is no denial of the fact that compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Collector was received by Respondent No.1 as owner; and (vi) The fact that the father of Respondent No.1 may be administering his land as his agent or nominee and may also be receiving the benefits/income derived from the said land may reflect a mutual family arrangement. It does not detract from the fact that Respondent No.1 is the owner of the said land which proprietary constitutes rights, title, his asset. ownership All and interest in the said land vest in him. He has the power to sell, alienate and dispose of such properties without any legal or

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Khuhro v. Khan

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether misstatements on the candidate’s election papers are sufficient to declare an election void.

Alleged Acts: The appellant contests the election results on the grounds that the prevailing candidate made false declaration on the candidacy documents. The appellant sought a declaration that the election results were void and that the election be reordered. The appellant argues that the candidate made false declarations my misstating assets of himself and his dependents. However, the respondent states that the representation made on the candidacy documents are from misunderstanding on property documents and the difference of 140 reported acres of land stems from the candidate solely reporting the property in his direct control and ownership. The candidate further stated that there was no ill intent behind the omission because there would be no measurable advantage in the land acreage difference.

Summary: Declaring an election void requires an invalid candidacy, illegal, or corruption actions. The evidentiary burden requires that a false statement be intentional under the circumstances. The court found and the respondent admitted that he did not declare his entire land holdings, as asserted by the appellant. Section 137(4) permits candidates may face legal liability with 120 days from the date of submission if he commits and offense or corrupt practice. The respondent made no effort to fix the mistakes in the asset report. Further, the court determined that the respondent was aware of the land transfer back into his name as early as 2014.

Conclusion: The court determined that the respondent concealed his assets and did so not by mistake or clerical error. Therefore, the election of the respondent was annulled and the Election Commission order to hold a new election for the position in the Provincial Assembly.

Legal Issue(s)

Candidate Registration
Electoral Integrity

Applicable Law(s): Pakistan Constitution Article 62(1)(f)

Region: Asia-Pacific

Country: Pakistan

Language of Decision

English

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Aug 1, 2019

Geolocation

Latitude: 33.84616314

Longitude: 73.04529661

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Khuhro v. Khan.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Khuhro v. Khan

Primary Documents

Notifications