PESHAWAR, Jan 15: An accountability appellate bench of the Peshawar High Court on Wednesday set aside the conviction of senior bureaucrat Ahmad Nawaz Shinwari and referred his case back to the accountability court concerned for retrial.

The bench comprising Justice Nasirul Mulk and Justice Ijaz Afzal ordered that the appellant should be released on furnishing two sureties of Rs1 million each. The bench pronounced a short order, observing that the retrial should be conducted in terms of the observation to be made in the detailed judgment.

The bench also dismissed the National Accountability Bureau's appeal filed for enhancing the sentence of the appellant. Mr Shinwari, who had served on various key posts, including that of commissioner in different divisions, was convicted on Oct 8, 2003, by the accountability court presided over by Saleem Khan. He was arrested on Feb 24, 2001.

The former bureaucrat was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment and fined Rs5,75,000. The trial court had convicted him on three counts. The court had observed that a cheque of Rs4,00,000 was issued by the accused when he was commissioner of Mardan division and that cheque was not accounted for. He had allegedly added a piece of land to his residence at Hayatabad Township causing Rs175,000 loss to the exchequer. He was also accused of leasing out a government motor workshop to his brother-in-law, which was amounted to misuse of power.

Appellant's counsel Barrister Zahoorul Haq said that while charging the appellant for issuance of the cheque, the prosecution had relied on the statement a senior clerk, Tilla Muhammad, but that official was never produced as a prosecution witness to confirm his allegations.

Mr Haq contended that as far as leasing out a workshop to his brother-in-law was concerned, the prosecution had itself admitted that no pecuniary loss had occurred to the exchequer. He raised objection to the NAB's appeal for enhancing sentence of the appellant, contending that under Section 32 of the NAB Ordinance, prior sanction of the chairman was required for filing an appeal, but the deputy prosecutor-general had not followed the rule.

The NAB deputy prosecutor-general, Mian Fasihul Mulk, contended that the appellant had misused his office while leasing out the government workshop to his relative and addition of land to his residence.