PESHAWAR: Eight independent candidates belonging to the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, including five former lawmakers, on Friday moved the Peshawar High Court against the provisional election results about the victory of their rivals in their respective constituencies.
They filed separate petitions for pronouncement that the provisional consolidation of votes polled in their constituencies is illegal.
The petitioners also requested the court to declare Form 47 issued for the provisional consolidated statement of election results unlawful for violating the Elections Act, 2017, and Election Rules.
The petitioners also sought the suspension of action on Form 47 and prayed the court to stop returning officers from consolidating poll results until the disposal of their petitions.
The petitioners include former provincial ministers Taimoor Saleem Khan Jhagra (PK-79) and Kamran Khan Bangash (PK-82), former deputy speaker of the KP Assembly Mahmood Jan (PK-72), former MNA Sajid Nawaz Khan (NA-28), former MPA Arbab Jehandad Khan (PK-74), former district nazim Mohammad Asim (PK-78) and lawyers Ali Zaman (PK-73) and Malik Shahab (PK-75).
Their petitions were filed by Ali Gohar Durrani, Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah, Shah Faisal Uthmankhel and other senior lawyers.
The petitioners said in their almost identical petitions that Thursday’s general elections were marked by “unprecedented and massive pre-poll rigging in various modes and forms.”
They said after the closure of polling, which was marred by the disruption of mobile phone service, the polled votes were counted and duly-signed Form 45 (election results in a polling station) were issued to their polling agents.
Mr Jhagra said Form 45 clearly showed the petitioner with 24,302 votes and runner-up candidate Attaul Haq with 4,617 votes and Jalal Khan with 1,537 votes.
Mr Bangash said he got 30,068 votes as per Form 45.
The other petitioners also claimed that they bagged the most votes in their respective constituencies according to Form 45.
They said the petitioner got to the returning officer to get the provisional consolidated poll results but they or their polling agents were denied entry to the premises from 9pm to 6am.
The petitioners said they were informed as a Form 45 requirement that they weren’t successful. They also insisted votes polled for them were reduced.
The petitioners argued that the elections, already marred by massive rigging, lost credibility due to the “illegal move.”
They said they tried in vain to approach their respective returning officers to get those grievances addressed under the Election Act.
The petitioners said the sanctity of votes was violated and the will of the voters was overturned during the results compilation.
They said Section 92 of the Election Act that required candidates or their polling agents to be present during results compilation for provisional consolidation before the issuance of Form 47 was also violated.
The petitioners said returning officers didn’t offer any justification for discrepancies in Form 45 and Form 47.
They contended that the Constitutional guarantee of their right to be dealt with in accordance with the law was violated and therefore, the impugned order for poll results compilation was liable to be struck down.
Published in Dawn, February 10th, 2024
