PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Friday suspended dead sentence granted by the military court and directed the authorities to submit written response in the case till next hearing of the case.
The order was issued by a two-judge bench headed by Justice Ikramullah Khan while hearing a writ petition filed by the family of Ayub Khan (The convict) through his lawyer Sajeed Khan Afridi.
Afridi argued before the bench that he was not given a free and fair trial as guaranteed by laws and constitution of the country. He further argued that the no proper evidence was presented against the convict on the base of which he could be sentenced to death.
Sajeed Khan furthered that Ayub got missing from the Bara, Batatal area in 2016. In 2018, the lawyer added, his family came to know that he was sentenced to death by a court. He is accused of attacks on security forces and other terrorist activities.
The bench after hearing the arguments suspended the death sentence and directed the federal ministry of interior to submit a response in the case, till next hearing of the case.
High Court sets aside sentence of alleged militant
The Peshawar High Court (PHC) set aside the punishment of an alleged militant, who was sentenced by the political administration for 40 years for involvement in schools bombings and other anti-state activities.
The order was issued by a two-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth while hearing the writ petition filed by the family of Ihsan Ullah alias Sailay son of Kyfayat Ullah, a resident of Dak Utmanzai in district Mohmand. He was arrested by the security forces in 2013. Ihsan was, later on, handed over to the district administration. The administration under the Frontier Crime Regulations sentenced him for 40 years.
His lawyer, Miangul Afrasiab Kakakhel, argued that Ihsan was arrested by the security forces in 2013. Ihsan was, later on, handed over to the district administration. The administration, under the Frontier Crime Regulations, sentenced him for 40 years.
Kakakhel further argued that since the punishments were awarded after the passage of 25th constitutional amendments hence, it has no legal status. The attorney alleged that his clients were not given a fair trial and was treated under the past colonial laws.