PESHAWAR, May 28: An accountability appellate bench of the Peshawar High Court set aside here on Wednesday the conviction of a former senator of PML-N, Jawed Iqbal Abbasi, and remanded his case back to the trial court.

The bench, comprising Justice Tariq Pervaiz and Justice Abdur Rauf Lughmani, observed that the trial court had overlooked various legal points while framing the charge against the appellant.

The bench directed the trial court that the decision about the assets belonging to the children of the appellant should be taken on merit.

The appellate bench had reserved its judgment last year after completion of arguments by both the parties.

Advocate Abdul Samad Khan had represented the appellant, whereas the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) was represented by Qazi Rasheedul Haq.

Mr Abbasi was convicted on Nov 29, 2001, and was sentenced to five years imprisonment with fine of Rs21.52 million. He was arrested on Aug 20, 2000, and since then he has been behind the bars.

The appellant had contended that in complete deviation to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, the trial court had conducted the trial without framing any specific charges.

He claimed that without framing of charges trial could not be conducted against an accused.

The appellant stated that the only thing mentioned in the charge sheet against him was that he had made fortune to the tune of Rs40 million through corruption and corrupt practices which was a crime under the NAB Ordinance 1999. He added that the accused was not informed in specific terms about his crime. He quoted various sections of CrPC, stating that these were not followed by the trial court.

The appellant’s counsel said that the ‘benamidars’ mentioned in the trial were not issued any notice by the court and they were condemned unheard.

He contended that it was violation of the principle of natural justice to condemn a person unheard.

Referring to various judgments of the superior courts, he said that the charges framed by the court should be clear.

Qazi Haq rebutted appellant’s arguments and contended that the trial court had mentioned the charges of corruption and corrupt practices against the appellant.

He contended that main charge against him was possessing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.