Imran requests SC to dismiss petition against him

Says Hanif Abbasi’s application is not bona fide, was filed to counter Imran’s petition against PM

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chairman Imran Khan has approached the Supreme Court to dismiss Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N)’s plea for his disqualification.

A three-judge bench of the top court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, will on Wednesday (today) resume the hearing of PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi’s petition seeking the disqualification of Imran Khan and Jahangir Tareen as members of the National Assembly on the basis of concealment of their sources of income.

The PTI chief, through his counsel Naeem Bukhari, has filed a reply over the miscellaneous application, filed by PML-N leader for impleading the federal government and Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) as party in the main case.

The PTI chief, referring to paragraph 18 of Abbasi’s petition, has objected that the petitioner has not made his sisters—Uzma Khan and Aleema Khan—parties, adding that they are necessary parties in this case.



“There is no averment in the entire petition with respect to the federation, which is now sought to be belatedly impleaded”, says the reply.

Imran has also told the SC that the ECP has already rejected reference against him through its March 16 decision.

He also stated that petitioner Hanif Abbasi is not bona fide as he filed the petition to counter Imran’s petition seeking the PM’s disqualification.

Imran stated that the petitioner is an accused in the “infamous ephedrine scam” and was defeated by him in the last general election, adding that the petition is merely a misplaced filing to establish loyalty to the current prime minister, whose status on his seat has yet to be determined by a JIT in the first instance, and then the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, PTI’s legal team – Anwar Mansoor Khan and Chaudhry Faisal Hussain – will file a reply today (Wednesday). The PTI will also inform the SC that matters relating to foreign funding are already sub judice before the ECP and that the commission should be allowed to adjudicate on it.