PESHAWAR, Dec 14: An accountability appellate bench of the Peshawar High Court on Tuesday set aside conviction of 27 officials of revenue department and remanded their case back to the trial court.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Tariq Pervez and Justice Dost Mohammad Khan ordered the accountability court to conduct their trial afresh. The bench also granted bail to those convicts who are still behind bars.

The accountability court presided over by Saleem Khan had convicted the 27 appellants on Nov 23 in an accountability reference and had sentenced them to different prison terms, ranging from three months to three years, with fine.

The appellants included three naib tehsildar, three gardawar and 21 patwaris. One naib tehsildar, Mosam Khan, was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of one million rupees. Gardawar Sareer Khan was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs 800,000.

Five appellants including a naib tehsildar, Momin Khan, and four patwari Mohammad Ibrar, Dilawar Khan, Purdil Khan and Salahuddin Khan, were sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment each, with different amount of fine.

The National Accountability Bureau had filed a reference of Rs46.11 million against the appellants, charging them of jointly and several of them in collusion with each other caused a loss to the public exchequer and in turn got illegal pecuniary benefits.

The NAB alleged that the accused had registered mutations of properties during ban imposed by the provincial government. It was alleged that the provincial government had placed a ban on registration of mutations of properties on July 1, 1994, but the appellants had ignored that ban.

Various lawyers appeared for the appellants. Advocate Safeerullah Khan, appearing for some of the appellants, argued that the trial court had not mentioned any ground on the basis of which the appellants were convicted.

He contended that from the entire judgment it was not clear on what charges the appellants were sentenced. Mr Khan argued that there was not a single evidence against the appellants.