ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed the disqualification petition against Awami Muslim League (AML) chief Sheikh Rashid in the misdeclaration of assets case.

A three-member bench headed by Justice Sheikh Azmat and comprising Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and Justice Qazi Faez had reserved the verdict on March-20, 2018.

The short verdict which was announced by Justice Azmat came by a majority of 2-1. Justice Qazi issued a dissenting note saying that the case should be sent to full court.

Talking to media, Rashid maintained that he is a humble an ordinary person and Allah has granted him respect. “I also thank my lawyer. I belong to Rawalpindi and all my assets belong there. I have done nothing wrong,” he said.

The AML leader called on Sharif brothers and remarked, “I am coming Nawaz and Shehbaz. My city has given me the name of ‘Pindi Boy’. I will punish the looters while forming government with Imran Khan. I will hold a rally on June 23 and 24 in Liaquat Bagh.”

“I had stated earlier that if the decision came against me I will accept it. My name is Sheikh Rashid not Nawaz Sharif. I am not a production of GHQ gate no.4,” he criticized.

Court against Rashid was moved by Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz’s (PML-N) leader Malik Shakeel Awan who had lost the general elections 2013 against the former. Awan in his petition has accused Rashid of misdeclaring assets in the nomination forms that he had submitted to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for the general elections in 2013.

In his media talk following the verdict, he said, “Sheikh Rashid hd said in his statement that the accusations are true but occured mistakenly. He submitted an affidavit stating that he concelaed the assets. Verdict against Nawaz Sharif vame on the basis of iqaama and not Panama. I trust the judiciary and will continue to seek justice from courts.”

Awan’s legal counsel—during hearing—argued that Representation of People’s Act compels public representative to accurately declare all assets before contesting general elections.

Rashid’s lawyer—during hearing—contended that his client had not concealed anything while accepting at the same time that Rashid had made a mistake in determining value of his assets.