PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on May 5 converted to life imprisonment the sentences of death awarded on multiple counts to a “serial” rapist and killer by a trial court last year.
A bench consisting of Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Farah Jamshed pronounced a short order partially allowing three appeals filed by the convict, Sohail Alias Malang, challenging his conviction in the high-profile case by a child protection court on Jun 16, 2025.
The detailed judgement will be released later.
The appellant had faced trial for sexually assaulting three minor girls and killing two of them, while leaving the third one in critical condition presuming her to be dead.
Partially accepts pleas of convict against child protection court judgement
The occurrences had taken place on successive Sundays in July 2022 creating fear and unrest among the inhabitants of different areas in the provincial capital and resulting into a public outcry, becoming a challenge for local police.
The occurrences took place in the limits of three police stations, including East Cantt, West Cantt and Gulberg.
Subsequently, accused Sohail, who was an embroiderer in Peshawar’s Saddar Bazaar, was arrested and he also recorded his confessional statement before a magistrate.
The court had convicted him on multiple counts under sections 302 (intentional murder), 376 (rape), 377 (unnatural offence) and some other provisions of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). He was also sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 53 (child sexual abuse) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Child Protection and Welfare Act.
Advocate Waqas Khan Chamkani appeared for the appellant and contended that the prosecution case was replete with several loopholes and the trial court had erred in convicting his client.
He argued that the appellant had remained in illegal custody of the police for many days following which his arrest was declared on July 28, 2022.
Three days later, he stated, the appellant was produced for recording his confessional statement. He argued that the so-called confession was under duress as the appellant had remained in illegal custody, and the requirements provided under the law for recording a confession had also not been followed.
Mr Chamkani pointed out that while his client was taken into custody on July 17, 2022, one of the occurrences had also taken place that day. He questioned how the appellant could committhat offence when he was in custody of the police.
He further argued that protocols provided for conducting DNA tests of the appellant and the victims had not been followed by the investigating officer. He added that even the results of the DNA sampling didn’t mention with accuracy that the appellant was the offender and it was only mentioned that his involvement couldn’t be excluded.
A law officer appearing for the state argued that there was incontrovertible evidence against the appellant and the investigation team had also conducted DNA sampling, which matched with him.
He stated that geo-fencing of the areas where the occurrences had taken place also proved the presence of the appellant there. He contended that the confessional statement recorded by the appellant before the magistrate was voluntary and he admitted his guilt in it.
The prosecution had claimed that the appellant used to first sexually assault his victim and then strangled her to death with her headscarves.
It added while two of the victims were killed, the third one had gone unconscious due to which she was presumed dead by the appellant.
The crimes took place on successive Sundays on July 3, July 10 and July 17, 2022, and all the victims were of minor age.
The police claimed that several teams were formed to trace and arrest the accused and they examined over 2,000 hours long CCTV footage, geo-fenced at least 10 places, obtained records of hundreds of telephone calls and quizzed more than 500 suspects.
Published in Dawn, May 6th, 2026.
