Supreme Court Permits Akhtar Mengal For 2024 Elections

In a session presided over by Chief Justice Faiz Isa, a three-member bench considered an appeal challenging the approval of Akhtar Mengal’s nomination papers for an upcoming election. Sultan Ahmed represented the petitioner during the proceedings.

It was highlighted in the court that Yasir Ahmed had lodged an appeal opposing the acceptance of Akhtar Mengal’s nomination papers. The initial rejection of Mengal’s nomination papers by the returning officer had led to an appeal, subsequently overturned by the Election Tribunal, which approved the papers. The higher court then affirmed the tribunal’s decision.

Raed more: BAP Defends Senate Resolution for Election Delay, Calls for ECP Review

In the recent hearing, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against the high court’s ruling that sanctioned Akhtar Mengal’s nomination papers. The court’s stance was noteworthy as it refrained from intervening in electoral matters.

The legal journey began when the returning officer initially disapproved Akhtar Mengal’s nomination papers. Subsequently, the Election Tribunal’s reversal of this decision led to approval. Despite the scrutiny and legal challenges, the high court upheld the decision of the tribunal.

In the apex court’s recent pronouncement, the dismissal of the appeal indicates a reluctance to interfere in electoral proceedings. This underscores the court’s deference to established legal processes and a preference for avoiding interference in matters concerning elections.

The legal representation by Sultan Ahmed on behalf of the petitioner highlights the importance of legal advocacy in electoral disputes. The proceedings involved a careful examination of the decisions made at various stages, from the rejection of nomination papers to the subsequent approvals by the Election Tribunal and the high court.

While the specific details of the appeal and the grounds for the court’s decision are not provided, the outcome suggests a recognition of the legal principles and authorities governing electoral disputes. The court’s reluctance to intervene may stem from the notion of allowing the electoral process and relevant legal mechanisms to address such matters without unwarranted interference from the judiciary.

In conclusion, the recent Supreme Court decision to dismiss the appeal against the approval of Akhtar Mengal’s nomination papers signifies a commitment to non-interference in electoral matters. This approach aligns with the principle of respecting the decisions of electoral bodies and legal processes involved in the scrutiny of nomination papers. The legal representation during the proceedings highlights the importance of a robust legal framework in handling electoral disputes and the role of the judiciary in upholding the integrity of the electoral process.