' The appellant submitted his nomination papers dated 30-3-2013 for contesting the election for NA-95 Gujranwala. The appellant claims to be a property dealer by profession as per information stated in Column No,8 of the nomination papers. The scrutiny of the nomination papers of the appellant was conducted by the Returning Officer on 6-4-2013 and his nomination papers were rejected vide order dated 6-4-2013 on the ground that the assets declared by the appellant are not commensurate with his declared income and that the source of the specific accretion of Rs,32,36,527/- in between the assets declared for the year 2011 and 2012 is not duly explained. The Returning Officer further observed that the appellant has tried to convert the black money into the white money and is guilty of wilful concealment therefore he does not qualify to be an eligible candidate keeping in view the provisions of Article 62 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
2. Through the instant election appeal the order dated 6-4-2013 rejecting the nomination papers of the appellant has been assailed.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the appellant in a bona fide manner declared all his assets; that some of his property was sold which resulted into accretion as stated in the nomination papers. It is next contended that the income tax return of the appellant is produced along with the nomination papers which fully supports the declaration of assets made by the appellant. The learned counsel contends that the concept of black money has been illegally introduced by the Returning Officer into the case of the appellant: The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the disputed questions of facts could not have been resolved by the Returning Officer in a summary proceedings of scrutiny of nomination papers and that without recording the necessary evidence such questions could not have been resolved as solid evidence was required to prove that the money reflected in the accretion of the assets of the appellant was black money. It is next contended that for the purpose of declaring a person not sagacious and righteous the concept of imposition of punishment becomes apparent and no punishment can be imposed upon a person without giving him an opportunity to face the charges in accordance with due process of law. It is next contended that nobody objected to the nomination papers before the Returning Officer and passing of the impugned order was not sustainable in the eye of law. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the process which is bereft of fundamental principle of fair trial cannot be described, as legal. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that there was no material available to hold that any false affidavit was submitted by the appellant in respect of the contents of the disclosures made in the nomination papers. The learned counsel contends that the smooth running of democracy demands that a fair opportunity be allowed to every person to contest the elections and the liberal interpretation is to be placed upon different provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1976 and the other relevant election laws so that the unnecessary hurdle is not created for the appellant and such like persons to participate and contest the national elections. The learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the judgments reported as HAJI GHULAM SABIR ANSARI V. THE RETURNING OFFICER AND OTHERS (PLD 1997 SC 290), FAHAD MALIK V. MIR MUMTAZ HUSSAIN JAKHRANI (2008 CLC 457) and FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS V. MIAN MUHAMMAD NAWAZ SHARIF AND OTHERS (PLD 2009 SC 644) in support of his above contentions.
4. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant.
5. First of all it would be necessary and important to highlight the important facts available on the record of the instant case.
6. The appellant submitted his nomination papers filed on 28-3-2013 duly signed by him and presented before the Returning Officer on 30-3-2013 at 3-45 p.m. The appellant verified the contents of the nomination papers through his statement on oath annexed with the same. The appellant also duly signed a No Objection Certificate clause (b) of which is relevant and is reproduced:- "(b) I, Mr. Muhammad Ashraf son of Ghulam Hussain state that failure to give detail regarding any item of this Form shall render my nomination to contest election invalid or if any information given hereinabove is found incorrect at any time my election shall stand void ab initio."
' The Column No,12 deals with the disclosure of total income, sources of income, tax year and the income tax paid by the candidate. In this column the appellant declared his total income for the year 2012 as a property dealer to be Rs,395,000/-for which he paid income tax of Rs,29,625/-. For the year 2011 he declared his total income at Rs,285,000/-for which he claimed to have paid the income tax of Rs,30,138/-and for the year 2010 he claimed his total income to be Rs,350,000/- resulting into payment of income tax of Rs,26,273/-. In the column of statement of assets and liabilities held by the appellant on 30-6-2012 the following declaration of assets was made; for the year 2012 the assets of the value of Rs,2,63,42,096/- has been declared. In the same column the appellant declared his assets for the previous year on 30-6-2011 of the value of Rs,2,31,05,569/-. In paragraph No,3 of the declaration of assets the appellant himself disclosed an increase of Rs,32,36,527/-in his assets during the year 2011 to 2012. The learned counsel for the appellant during his arguments stated that this accretion has taken place due to sale of the properties previously owned by the appellant. The appellant has placed on record a copy of list of his assets and liabilities submitted to the Income Tax Department for the year 2012 in which the appellant declared his total wealth on 30-6-2011 at Rs,2,15,66,569/-. The grand total of his assets both immovable and moveable in his tax return as declared by the appellant as per said list is stated to be Rs,2,48,03,096/-. The appellant declared an accretion of Rs,32,36,527/-in his return and the explanation given to the income tax department of this accretion is as follows:--- S. No.Description Amount
1. Foreign remittances Rs.19,69,301/-
2. Business income Rs.3,95,000/-
3. Plot at C.G. Kamoke 8 marlas date of purchase 1-8- 2011Rs.9,25,000/-
4. Plot at C.G. Kamoke 08 marlas date of purchase 1- 8-2011Rs.9,25,000/
5. Plot at Kamoke zarai 18 marlas date of purchase 20-3-2013Rs.5,50,000/-
6. Agricultural income Rs.1,70,000/-
1. Thus the appellant declared a total accretion as Rs,49,34,301/-in the Income Tax Return for the year 2012 and after deducting the household expenses of Rs,250,000/-and cost of assets of Rs,14,47,774/-, the appellant declared his total savings for the year 2012 as Rs,32,36,527/-which is declared by the appellant himself as accretion. There is no declaration made in any of the documents annexed with the nomination papers or with the Income Tax Department that appellant received this increase in his assets due to sale of some previous properties; wherefrom the appellant received foreign remittances and the other huge amount totalling Rs,49,34,301/-as declared in his income tax return is given in any of the documents. Admittedly the appellant's total income from his property dealership is Rs,395,000/-for the year 2012 and after deducting the personal expenses of Rs,250,000/-only Rs,155,000/- were left with the appellant from his business earning.
2. The appellant in the Column No,14 even did not allege any agricultural income which he declared in his description of assets and liabilities before the income tax authorities for the year 2012 as Rs,170,000/-. It is a fool-proof case of concealment of sources of the increase into assets of the appellant equivalent to huge amount of Rs,32,36,527/-. The total accretion disclosed in the income tax record has been mentioned by the appellant at Rs,49,34,301/-.
9. The concept of black money needs to be attended to. The term 'Black Money' for the purpose of instant case in the ordinary English and legal language can be described as an income illegally obtained or not declared for tax purposes as per the Collins English Dictionary the publication of which was made in the years 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000 and 2003. The term 'Black Money' in the field of economics has been defined on internet encyclopaedia as any money that a person acquires by means that involve tax evasion. In the Rafiq's Law Dictionary the term 'Black Money' has been defined to include an amount often not documented to avoid the payment of taxes .... Also term dirty money; grey money. In the field of financial crimes, micro economics and money laundering the 'Black Money' has been defined on internet as a money earned through illegal activity and the recipient of such a money must hide and spend it only on the underground economy. In the American Heritage Dictionary the term 'Black Money' is defined to include an income from illegal activities that is not reported to the government for tax purposes. The accretion claimed by the appellant without explanation of its resources can be validly declared to form part of the concept of "Black Money".
10. From the facts stated by the appellant in his nomination papers and from the contents of the income tax documents submitted by the appellant along with the nomination papers there is no apparent compatibility with his known source of income as declared by the appellant himself in the year 2012. Although the appellant has declared this increase in his income tax return in the schedule of assets and liabilities but he has not given the source through which the appellant acquired these huge assets. This apparently constitutes an act of deliberate concealment of facts and declaration of falsehood.
11. The nature of the proceedings which a Returning Officer undertakes for the purpose of scrutiny of the nomination papers has been given in section 14(3) of the Representation of the People Act 1976 in the following words:- "14. Sect-Willy:- (1) The candidates, their election agents [the proposers and seconders and one other person authorised in this behalf by each candidate] [and an elector who has filed an objection to the nomination of a candidate,] may attend the scrutiny of nomination papers, and the Returning Officer shall give them reasonable opportunity for examining all nomination papers delivered to him under section 12: ' Provided that an elector who has filed an objection to the nomination of a candidate shall only attend the scrutiny of the nomination paper of that candidate.]
(2) The Returning Officer shall, in the presence of the persons attending the scrutiny under subsection (1), examine the nomination papers and decide any objection raised by any such person to any nomination.
(3) Returning Officer may, either of his own motion or upon any objection, [either by an elector or] [by any person referred to in subsection (1),] conduct such summary enquiry as he may think fit and may reject nomination paper if he is satisfied that---
(a) the candidate is not qualified to be elected as a member;
(b) the proposer or the seconder is not qualified to subscribe to the nomination paper;]
(c) any provision of section 12 or section 13 has not been complied with [or submits any false or incorrect declaration or statement in any material particular]; or
(d) the signature of the proposer or the seconder is not genuine.] Provided that;---
(i) the rejection of a nomination paper shall not invalidate the nomination of a candidate by any other valid nomination paper;
(ia) the Returning Officer may, for the purpose of scrutiny, require any agency or authority to produce any document or record.]
(ii) the Returning Officer shall not reject a nomination paper on the ground of any defect which is not of a substantial nature and may allow any such defect to be remedied forthwith, including an error in retard to the name, serial number in the electoral roll or other particulars of the candidate or [his proposer or seconder] so as to bring them in conformity with the corresponding entries in the electoral roll; and
(iii) the Returning Officer shall not enquire into the correctness or validity of any entry in the electoral roll."
' The law itself visualized the adoption of summary method of proceeding by the Returning Officer for scrutinizing the nomination papers of the candidates. The term summary proceeding has been defined in the Blacks Law Dictionary 8th edition at page 1242 in the following mariner:--- "Summary proceeding: A nonjury proceeding that settles a controversy or disposes of a case in a relatively prompt and simple manner."
' The term 'summary' has also been defined in the Black's Law Dictionary in the same edition at page 1476: "Summary: An abridgment or brief to a short application to a court without the formality of a full proceeding." In the Rafiq's Law Dictionary the 'Summary Proceeding' has been defined: "A proceeding without following the strict rules of procedure for trial." at page 824 of its 2nd edition.
12. The Returning Officer has summarily considered and compared all the material available on the record and found the same not worthy of trust and declared the same incompatible. No evidence was required to be recorded as the documents were self-speaking. The findings recorded by the Returning Officer are supported by the available record and no illegality is found in the conclusions drawn by the Returning Officer.
13. The Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan in Article 62 provides that a person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless--- (f) he is sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and honest and ameen.
14. While interpreting the above clause (f) of Article 62 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the reported judgment MUDDASAR QAYYUM NAHRA VS. CH. BILAL IJAZ AND OTHERS (2011 SCM R 80) from pages 91 to 94 observed as follows:--- "The concept of inserting Article 62 clause (f) in the Constitution is very purposeful; Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 cannot be said to have incorporated the said clause without any meaningful objective. The holders of Public offices like Members of National and Provincial Assemblies are expected to be persons of unimpeachable character. The terms used in clause (f) of Article 62 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 need to be understood and implemented in order to stop dishonest and cheat ful persons from entering into the corridors of the National and Provincial Assemblies. The word "sagacious, righteous and non- profligate and honest and Ameen" written in clause (f) have been interpreted in well-known English Dictionaries as under:--- 1.1. Sagacious. The word sagacious denotes a prudent person skillful in statecraft or management, having prompt wisdom, ability to lead, insightful, having sense of honour, integrity and foresightedness, who is wise, learned and knowledgeable 1.2. Righteous. The word "righteous , as noun connotes, ethical morals. As an adjective it means just, morally correct, consonant with ethical principles or rules of positive law it is the opposite of wrong, unjust, illegal. The attitude of such a person in all walks of life must be (i). Morally upright, without guilt or sin
(ii) Characterized by accepted standard of morality or justice
(iii) Good: morally admirable (iv). Clean handed; guiltless (v).Just: Used, especially of what is legally or ethically right or proper or befitting (vi). Moral: concerned with right and wrong or conforming to standards of behaviour: morally excellent worthy
(vii) Virtuous: morally excellent
(viii) Worthy: having worth or merit or value; being Hon'ble or admirable
(ix) Honest: blameless 1.3. Non profligate. The phrase "non profligate" as matter of affect connotes extravagant, spendthrift, corrupt self indulgent, immoral, decadent, etc. He can be called:
(i) Recklessly wasteful
(ii) Wildly extravagant
(iii) Shamelessly immoral or debauched
(iv) Spendthrift
(v) Prodigal in their expenditures
(vi) Squandering 1.4. Honest. An honest person is truthful, pious refrains committing major since(sins), God-fearing upright sincere believing to be answerable before Allah Almighty. He is
(i) Displaying integrity; upright
(ii) Not deceptive or fraudulent
(iii) Characterized by truth; not false
(iv) Sincere
(v) Not given to cheating Ameen. (An Arabic word) meaning: Trustworthy; faithful.
' The concepts projected in using all the above terminology is not difficult to understand. It demonstrates a keen desire of the Constitution that persons desiring to engage themselves in the process of law making for the country must themselves be possessed with High qualities of personal character, and moral values. A legislator who indulges into unfair Means in earning or procuring his educational documents cannot be termed to be possessing the required standards of high personal characteristics mentioned in clause D. Of Article '62 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Members of the National or Provincial Assemblies on their successful election have been further obliged to take oath as incorporated in the third schedule of the'
Constitution, with necessary condition of undertaking the performance of the duties and functions honestly in accordance with Constitution. Election members are further likely to be entrusted with the other high and onerous offices of the Prime Minister, Federal Ministers, Speaker of the National and Provincial Assemblies, Deputy Speakers of the National and Provincial Assemblies and Chief Ministers of the Provinces. The swearing of solemn oath from such holders of public offices are also prescribed in the Constitution requiring similar performances of duties and functions with honesty and also to be faithful to be (the) Constitution and the law. A person who indulges into using unfair means in procuring his educational qualifications and is also found guilty by the Disciplinary Committee, which is the only authority competent to inquire into the matters of such allegations against candidates appearing in the examination of the said University, does not deserve to claim to be an honest; righteous or Ameen person so that he be assigned the high responsibilities of performing national functions of running the affairs of the country. The spirit with which the words sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and Ameen have been used by the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 for the eligibility of the candidates contesting the elections of Members of National or Provincial Assembly cannot be allowed to be frustrated if persons who secure their educational documents through unfair means and are found guilty of such a condemnable act by file competent authority are allowed to be given entry into the doors of National or Provincial Assemblies or our country. Such a person is thus not worthy of credence and cannot be allowed to be entrusted with State responsibilities of Law Making; to be in-charge of the National Exchequer nr be eligible to represent the people of Pakistan."
15. The appellant has concealed his source of income regarding the accretion as claimed by him, he did not disclose in the column of the nomination papers specified for agricultural income any assets; his declaration of assets before the Income Tax Authorities for the year 2012 are also the outcome of suppressing the source of his acquisition of valuable property running into lacs of rupees. All the above circumstances deprive the appellant of the necessary eligibility criteria prescribed in Article 62(t) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The Returning Officer was fully justified in rejecting the nomination papers of the appellant through the impugned order.
16. The case-law relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant has no relevance to the decision of the controversy subject-matter of the instant appeal and is not applicable to the facts and circumstances existing herein.
17 The instant appeal being devoid of any merits is accordingly dismissed in limine.