ISLAMABAD, JAN 06, (DNA) – The Supreme Court of Pakistan has resumed hearing of the Panama Leaks case.

The case is being heard by a five-member larger bench headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s daughter Maryam Nawaz submitted her reply in the Supreme Court which included five-year details of her income.

She said that there were five houses in the Raiwand estate. In the first house her grandmother Shamim Akhtar lived. In the second house her parents, the Prime Minister and the first lady, lived. The third house is occupied by her late uncle Abbas Sharif’s family. In the fourth house Shehbaz Sharif lived. And in the fifth house she lived.

Speaking to the media outside the apex court, Awami Muslim League (AML) President Sheikh Rasheed said the Panama Leaks cases would conclude this month.

During Thursday’s proceedings, the prime minister’s lawyer Makhdoom Ali submitted his reply which included details of the prime minister’s public office tenure.

The reply states that the prime minister was provincial finance minister from 1981 to 1985, after which he occupied the office of Chief Minister Punjab till 1988. During the period of April-May 1988 he was acting chief minister. Till 1990 he was CM Punjab again.

He went on to become prime minister till 1993 for the first time, and then from 1997 till 1999 he was prime minister for the second time. From 1993 till 1996 he was opposition leader. He was exiled in 2000, and his exile ended in 2007.

Copies of the reply were submitted to PTI.

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa remarked, that Nawaz Sharif had said that his leftover factories were shut down by Pervez Musharraf. “How did he erect the Jeddah factories in exile then? Sharif family’s financial adviser had promised to produce evidence in court. But now you are saying there is no evidence.”

During the last hearing, the Qatar letter came into discussion. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf counsel Naeem Bukhari argued that the letter should be discarded from the case proceedings. Justice Asif Khosa however remarked that the Sharifs based their entire argument on the letter and it could not be done away with without solid evidence.

The court in its remarks said that Maryam Nawaz owned half of London. “How can she be someone’s dependent?” The court asked Bukhari to avoid using evidence from the media.=DNA

=============