ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday granted approval to the request of PTI candidate Sanaullah Masti Khel, allowing him to participate in the upcoming Feb 8 general elections from NA-91, Bhakkar.
A three-judge SC panel, led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, approved the plea despite objections from the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), which argued that the polling materials had been finalized, and ballot paper printing plates were ready. Nevertheless, the top court directed the ECP to include the candidate’s name on the ballot papers.
The appeal was filed by Sanaullah Masti Khel, a former member of the National Assembly and the provincial assembly from Bhakkar. The appeal contested the decision of the Lahore High Court, Multan bench, which had upheld the rejection of the petitioner’s nomination papers by the returning officer (RO).
During the proceedings, the Director-General of Law, Muhammad Arshad, opposed the idea of granting relief to the petitioner. Justice Musarrat Hilali questioned how everything could be finalized when several measures before the elections were still pending.
CJP Isa asked whether the ECP was attempting to establish that the decision of the RO was final. Justice Hilali wondered about the rush in the high court to dismiss the election tribunal’s decision. He noted that the case could have been adjourned for the next day instead of being decided in a single day.
When it was mentioned that Sanaullah Masti Khel had been declared a proclaimed offender, CJP Isa questioned the nature of his alleged crime, asking whether he was involved in a terrorism or kidnapping case.
Meanwhile, a separate three-judge SC bench, including Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Shahid Waheed, and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, is scheduled to hear on Friday the plea of PTI activist Sanam Javaid Khan. She filed appeals against the rejection of her candidature from National Assembly constituencies NA-119 and NA-120, as well as the Punjab Assembly seat PP-150, all located in Lahore.
Through Advocate Shahzib Masud, she requested the court to overturn the rejection of her nomination papers. The petition argued that the high court had erred in disqualifying the petitioner on grounds other than those provided in Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution. Adding supplementary grounds for disqualification, the high court effectively amended the Constitution, according to the petition. The petitioner highlighted her eight-month confinement, preventing her from opening a fresh bank account, and argued that she provided her existing account, as per the law, for bearing election expenses.