PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court has set aside the conviction of a man for killing his wife and an unborn child and remanded his case back to the trial court for fresh hearing.

A bench consisting of Justice Mohammad Naeem Anwar and Justice Shahid Khan partially accepted the appeal of convict Abdullah.

While sending the case back for retrial, it directed the trial court in Malakand district to frame thecharge against him afresh and conduct trial.

The appellant was convicted on Feb 16, 2022, by an additional sessions judge in Malakand on two counts and was sentenced to 14 years imprisonment for killing his wife. He was also fined Rs500,000 to be paid to legal heirs of the deceased.

Remands case back to trial court

He was further convicted under Section 338-C of the Pakistan Penal Code as the deceased was pregnant at the time of her murder. He was handed down seven years imprisonment and Rs100,000 fine.

The murders were reported in the jurisdiction of Levies Post, Sakhakot, Malakand, on Aug 9, 2020.

The complainant in the case was the deceased’s brother, Naveedur Rehman, who claimed that his sister was married to the appellant around six years ago and had two children with him.

He added that the couple had a strained relationship that led to his sister’s murder by strangling.

The complainant claimed that the appellant informed him about the murder over the phone and challenged him to take revenge.

The woman was strangled to death allegedly by the appellant.

Following his arrest, a complete charge sheet was put in court and the first formal charge was framed against him on Oct 21, 2020, for the murder of his wife. He pleaded not guilty.

However, a woman doctor, who performed apostmortem on the woman, said the deceased was four monthspregnant.

The police made another the murder charge against the appellant on Nov 17, 2021. He was indicted for the murders of his wife and her unborn child.

Barrister Asadur Rehman appeared for the appellant and contended that the general rule was that a person couldn’t be convicted of an offence he was not charged with and for which he had got no notice.

The bench observed that Section 222 of the Code of Criminal procedure declared that the charge should contain such particular as to the time, place as well as specific alleged offence, the manner in which the offence was committed and the particulars of the accused so as to afford an opportunity to him to explain the matter with which he was charged.

It addedthat there was nothing on record to show that the appellant was afforded any opportunity of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses after framing of the amended charge against him on Nov 17, 2021.

Published in Dawn, February 26th, 2024