The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition that called for the annulment of the February 8 general elections, following the petitioner’s failure to attend two consecutive hearings. The petitioner, Ali Khan, had initially sought the court’s intervention to mandate re-election under judicial oversight, citing concerns for fairness and integrity in the electoral process.
Ali Khan’s absence from the hearings, despite notices sent to his residence and efforts by the police to locate him, led to the court’s decision to dispose of the case. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, imposed a penalty of Rs500,000 on Khan for his non-appearance and the resultant abuse of the court’s processes.
During the proceedings, it was revealed that Ali Khan, a former brigadier with a history of court-martial, was abroad, having communicated his inability to attend the hearings through an email. This email, which included his travel documents to Bahrain, raised questions about the sincerity of his petition.
The court’s decision came after a brief interruption by PTI leader Shaukat Basra, who was advised by the Chief Justice to refrain from involvement in the case due to his lack of direct connection. The Supreme Court Bar Association President, Shahzad Shaukat, echoed this sentiment, suggesting Basra’s exclusion from the matter.
Chief Justice Isa noted the peculiar timing of Khan’s departure abroad, immediately following the filing of his petition, and remarked on the unusual choice of a one-way ticket, hinting at a possible publicity stunt.
The petition had originally called for an investigation into alleged election irregularities and sought to hold those responsible accountable for undermining democratic processes. It highlighted concerns over pre-poll rigging, the imprisonment of PTI founder Imran Khan on charges deemed fabricated by the petitioner, and alleged restrictions on PTI’s campaign activities, which were claimed to have skewed the electoral playing field.
Despite these allegations, the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the petition closes this chapter, leaving the February 8 election results standing and reinforcing the judiciary’s stance against what it perceives as frivolous or manipulative legal challenges.
