The legal wizards are divided over the possible outcome of a disqualification case against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan in Supreme Court.

Ikram Chaudhry, former vice president of the Supreme Court Bar Association said that Imran Khan's case is different from that of the ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif because Imran Khan had revealed his assets to the apex court, unlike the former Premier; and therefore Section 12 and 90 of Representative of Peoples Act (ROPA) would not be applicable and not attract Article 62 (1) (f) of the Constitution.

Noted lawyer and former deputy attorney general Shah Khawar said that if Sharif's removal on grounds that he lied about his assets is possible, then it is out of the question that Imran Khan will escape the wrath of the law as he is facing similar allegations in the apex court.

Khawar argued that Nawaz Sharif faced disqualification for not declaring 10,000 UAE dirham salary in his nomination papers submitted to Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in 2013 general election while Imran Khan too did not declare his offshore company in his asset details submitted to the ECP in 2013. Khawar added that if it is proved that Khan's company was operational till 2015 then he made a wrong declaration and concealed facts, and would therefore face disqualification.

In a written reply submitted to the apex court, PTI chairman acknowledged that he was the owner of the offshore company - Niazi Services Limited - but contended that he was not the registered shareholder of nine shares of the company and therefore it was neither mandatory nor a binding obligation to disclose the company to the ECP.