Alert Sign Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to turn off Adblock on Dawn.com.

Alert Sign Dear reader, please upgrade to the latest version of IE to have a better reading experience

.

The Supreme Court on Friday will announce its verdict on a petition seeking the disqualification of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf chief Imran Khan and secretary-general Jahangir Tareen, DawnNews reported on Thursday evening.

The verdict, which had been reserved by the bench on November 14, is expected to be read out at 2pm tomorrow afternoon by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar. Justices Nisar, Faisal Arab and Umar Ata Bandial had comprised the three-member bench which heard the case.

The petitions filed by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader Hanif Abbasi on Nov 2 last year sought the two PTI leaders’ disqualification over non-disclosure of assets and existence of their offshore companies, as well as receiving foreign funds for their party.

Senior counsel Naeem Bukhari, who represented Khan, had argued during the proceedings that the case should not be treated on a par with the Panama Papers case in which former prime minister Nawaz Sharif was disqualified because, according to him, there was a world of difference between the two.

In this case, he had said, no money was sent out of the country, adding that it could be the case of a young man who could not manage his accounts properly.

Bukhari had also argued that his client did not mention his Draycott flats of London in his statement of assets and later benefited from the tax amnesty scheme of 2000, asking if utilising the amnesty scheme be considered dishonesty. But he admitted that the line between honesty and dishonesty had to be drawn by the apex court.

During closing arguments Bukhari had told the court that his client had submitted all documents they could obtain before the court.

After the court reserved its verdict in the case against Khan, the bench had proceeded to question the lawyer representing Tareen regarding the latter's properties in Britain.

Specifically, the bench had inquired after Hyde House — a piece of property in London which covers 12 acres of land — which Tareen claims to have bought for his children through a trust.

The bench had subsequently reserved its verdict on Tareen's disqualification after hearing arguments on his line of defence from both sides.

However, before closing the proceedings, the chief justice had told all parties not to expect an early decision on the case.