Source: https://pakistanconstitutionlaw.com/p-l-d-1991-karachi-1-3/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 23:01:45+00:00

Document:
F.A. KHAN AV. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN PLD 1964 SC 520. Ref.
STATE OF MAHARASHTERA V. B.K.TAKKAMORE AIR 1967 SC 1353. Ref.
PLD 1969 SC 210; DR. RAM AKRISHAN BHARDWAJ V. THE STATE OF DELHI AND OTHERS AIR 1953 SC 318; KESHAV TALPADA V. EMPEROR AIR 1943 FC 1; HASSAN NASIR V. THE CROWN PLD 1953 SINDH 37; DHIRAJLAL GIRDHARILAL V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMBAY, AIR 1955 SC 271. Ref.
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN V. MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAH KHAN PLD 1989 SC 166 Distinguished.
MUHAMMAD SHARIF’S CASE PLD 1988 LAHORE 725; HAJI SAIFULLAH’S CASE PLD 1989 SC 166. Ref.
MUHAMMAD SHARIF’S CASE PLD 1988 LAHORE 725. Ref.
Article 58(2)(b) — Dissolution of National Assembly by the President — One of the ground in the order of dissolution was corruption and nepotism in the Federal Government, its functionaries and authorities and agencies including the statutory and other corporation. Banks and also in the ranks of holders of representative offices — Facts stated and documents produced prime facie gave the impression of instances of corrupition, favouritism and nepotism — Where corruption was of enormous nature affecting major spheres of life and it was a motivating force in taking major decision and publlic dealings by the Government and administration, it kwould surely have nexus with the order of dissolution of National Assembly — Corruption” — Concept and its effect on society discussed.
Article 58(2)(b) — Term “appeal” referred to in Article 58(2)(b) of the Constitution sugests reference of the matter to the “higher forum” which is the electorate — Situation contemplated by Article 58(2)(b) of the Constitution is a situation excluding all other avenues but to refer the matter to the electorate for its fresh verdict.
GOVERNMENT OF WEST PAKISTAN V. HAIDER BUX JATOI PLD 1969 SC 210; MAULVI TAMIZUDDIN KHAN V. GOVERNOR-GENERAL’S SPECIAL REFERENCE NO. 1 OF 1955 PLD 1955 FC 435; MOULVI MUHAMMAD ALI V. CROWN PLD 1950 FC 1; RAFIQUE AHMED SHEIKH V. CROWN PLD 1951 LAHORE 17; THE STATE OF MARASHTRA V. BABULAL KIRPARAM TAKKAMORE AIR 1967 SC 1353. Ref.
Articles 58(2)(b) & 199 — Dissolution of National Assembly by the President — Judicial review — Provision of Article 58(2)(b) has to be invoked by the President to meet a serious situation and the purpose of the exercise ought not to be defeated merely because oine or some of the grounds in the order of the President were found to be unsustainable.
Articles 58(2)(b) & 199 — Dissolution of National Assembly by the President — Judicial review — Scope — Onus would be discharged by the Federation by production of tangible material before the Court to show that the opinion under Article 58(2)(b) of the Constitution had been reasonably and honestly formed.
Articles 58(2)(b) & 199 — Dissolution of National Assembly by the President — Judicial review — Scope — Mere fact that Article 58(2)(b) of the Constitution requires holding of elections within 90 days could not grant immunity to the impugned order of the President dissolving the National Assembly if the same was found to have no nexus with the preconditions laid down by Article 58(2)(b) for exercise of such power.
Articles 58 & 199 — Power of dissolving National Assembly under Article 58 rests with the Prime Minister as well as the President — Scope of respective powers of the President and the Prime Minister — Judicial review — Constitutions.
MUHAMMAD SHARIF V. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN PLD 1988 LAHORE 725; FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN V. HAJI MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAH KHAN PLD 1989 SC 166 not applicable.
MUHAMMAD ANWAR DURRANI V. PROVINCE OF BALUCHISTAN PLD 1989 QUETTA 25 distinguished.

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.