Low Graphics Site
White bar
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker

Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Dawn Classified



FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

March 12, 2002 Tuesday Zilhaj 27, 1422

Click to learn more...
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
.




Judgment on Sherpao’s appeal reserved



Bureau Report


PESHAWAR, March 11: A two-member bench of the Peshawar High Court on Monday reserved judgment in an appeal of former chief minister Aftab Sherpao, challenging his conviction in absentia by an accountability court.

The appellant was sentenced to three years imprisonment under section 31-A of the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance 1999 dealing with an accused evading arrest. The bench comprised Chief Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan and Justice Malik Hamid Saeed.

Advocate Zafar Abbas Zaidi appeared for the appellant and Ziaur Rehman represented the NAB. Mr Zaidi contended that the concerned accountability court did not fulfil the legal requirements before convicting the appellant.

The lawyer argued that under the Criminal Procedure Code, before declaring a person proper summons had to be issued followed by arrest warrants. He claimed that Mr Sherpao was not served any summons by the trial court. He added that it was known to the prosecution and trial court that Mr Sherpao was out of the country and they could have served the summons on him in the UK.

Mr Zaidi contended that initially the appellant was charged under the Ehtesab Act, 1997, in a reference pertaining to illegal allotments of plots in Hayatabad Township and was fined Rs1 million. He said that the fine was suspended by the high court following which the appellant left the country. In that case, he added, the high court acquitted the appellant. He asked why Mr Sherpao was not arrested at that time if there were cases against him.

Ziaur Rehman argued that the appellant had left the country in an illegal manner. He rebutted the arguments of appellant’s counsel, arguing that summons were issued against the appellant on various occasions and he had wilfully evaded arrest.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2005
<>