PESHAWAR, Feb 8: The Peshawar High Court on Friday admitted for regular hearing an appeal of NWFP former chief minister Aftab Ahmad Khan Sherpao, challenging his conviction in absentia by an accountability court.

A division bench, comprising Chief Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan and Justice Malik Hamid Saeed, overruled a preliminary objection raised by the state counsel, Ziaur Rehman, that the appeal was not maintainable as it was filed while the appellant was absconding.

The bench observed that as the appellant had returned and surrendered to the state, therefore his appeal could be heard by the court.

The appellant was awarded three-year imprisonment by an accountability court when he was evading arrest and had escaped to London.

Advocate Ziaur Rehman argued that in the case of Habiullah Kundi, a former provincial minister, sentenced to three years for evading arrest, the high court had ruled that an appeal could not be filed in absentia.

He stated that same was the case with the present appellant as he was out of the country and his son had filed the appeal.

Advocate Zafar Abbas Zaidi, appearing for the appellant, argued that there was a difference between the cases of Mr Sherpao and Mr Kundi. He argued that the appeal was filed by Sikander Sherpao on behalf of his father as he was given power of attorney by the appellant.

Moreover, he argued that Mr Kundi was out of the country, whereas Mr Sherpao had now been in judicial custody.

Mr Zaidi argued that the appellant was first convicted and fined one million rupees by an accountability court and the said sentence was set aside by the court.

He added that there was no charge against the appellant when he left the country and it was in the knowledge of National Accountability Bureau.

The bench inquired from him why the appellant did not send his power of attorney through the concerned consulate. Mr Zaidi replied that there was no legal requirement that a power of attorney should be sent through the consulate.

The bench also inquired from the state counsel whether they had served any notice on the appellant through the consulate, Mr Rehman said that as son of the appellant was regularly attending the court proceedings, therefore, there was no need of sending notices through other channels.

The bench observed that on the one hand the NAB had not been accepting power of attorney given to son of the appellant and on the other hand they had been stating that his son was attending the proceedings.