Civil Appeal No.188 of 2019 . 19 Muhammad Dawood (2016 SCMR 1420) the omission by a lady returned candidate to disclose her agricultural land claimed to be transferred to her brothers without evidence of the mutation were held to annul their elections.” 22. Likewise in the case of Sher Baz Khan Gaadhi v. Muhammad Ramzan (2018 SCMR 1952), it was held by this Court as follows: “Constitution of Pakistan---Art. 63(1)(c)---Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976), S. 12(2)(a)---Candidate contesting General Elections— Nomination papers, rejection of—Dual citizenship— Submitting false affidavit with respect to dual citizenship— Record indicated that the respondent-candidate submitted his nomination papers on 10.6.2018 and filed the relevant affidavit in such regard on 11.6.2018. Two days later, he renounced his foreign citizenship on 13.6.2018. On the day the respondent filed his nominated papers he had not renounced his foreign citizenship and was a foreign citizen. Even, if it was assumed that the application of renunciation of foreign citizenship had been filed earlier, no disclosure of the same had been made by the respondent in the relevant column of the affidavit. Respondent had filed a false affidavit and made a false declaration on oath, therefore, he was disqualified from contesting elections. Appeal was allowed accordingly. Constitution of PakistanArt. 62(1)(f)—Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976). S. 12(2)(a)---Candidate contesting General Elections — Nomination papers, rejection of — Failure to disclose expenses incurred on foreign travel — Affidavit that had to be submitted along with nomination papers required a candidate to disclose his foreign travels during the last three years and the costs incurred thereon. Respondent-candidate crossed out the column on the affidavit requiring details of such travels and their costs. Report submitted before court by the relevant Authority showed that the respondent had a rich travelling history during the last three years. Respondent did not deny his travel history but tried to argue that at the relevant time he was a foreign national and thus not required to disclose his travel history. Such argument could not be accepted by the court. Respondent deliberately concealed his travel history in the relevant affidavit at the time of filing his nomination papers. Respondent concealed material facts under oath which he was required to disclose in his nomination papers/affidavit, therefore, he was disqualified from contesting elections. Appeal was allowed accordingly.” 23. In the case of Muhammad Nawaz Sharif v. Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi (PLD 2018 SC 1), while dealing with the similar proposition this Court held as follows: “9. The argument that even if it is assumed that unwithdrawn salary constitutes an asset, omission to