LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Monday reserved its verdict on the maintainability of an application by incarcerated PTI founding chairman Imran Khan challenging a trial court’s decision not to summon Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif in person for recording his statement in a defamation suit against the former. Justice Chaudhry Muhammad Iqbal heard a civil revision of the former prime minister filed through Advocate Shadab Hussain Jafri raising legal objections to the trial court’s decision in the defamation case. The lawyer argued that PM Shehbaz had filed a defamation suit against the PTI founding chairman in 2017 but was not being summoned in person to record his statement, relying instead on a written affidavit. He said under the law, the plaintiff/PM Shehbaz must personally appear in court to record his statement in the defamation suit. He highlighted that the trial court had dismissed objections to the prime minister’s non-appearance and allowed the statement to be recorded through an affidavit. The counsel asked the LHC to set aside the trial court’s decision and require PM Shehbaz to appear in person to record his statement in the suit. After hearing the arguments, Justice Iqbal reserved a verdict on the maintainability of the application. The defamation suit pending before a civil court since 2017 says Mr Khan wrongly accused PM Shehbaz of offering Rs10bn to the latter through a common friend in exchange for withdrawing the case of Panama Papers pending before the Supreme Court. The plaintiff said Mr Khan leveled baseless allegations on him, seeking a decree for recovery of Rs10bn as compensation from the defendant for publication of defamatory content. The PTI founding chief had filed his reply to the suit with a delay of four years in 2021 saying one of his friends told him that someone known to him and also the Sharif family approached him with an offer to pay billions of rupees if he could convince him (Mr Khan) to stop pursuing the Panama case. Mr Khan said he disclosed the incident for the consumption of the public at large and an act in the interest of the public good does not constitute any defamation. The reply maintained that Mr Khan did not specifically attribute any statement to the plaintiff (PM Shehbaz) while narrating the incident.