PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court on Friday put the federal government on notice, seeking its response to the petitions of 13 people against their conviction by military courts for involvement in the May 9, 2023, violent protests in parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

A bench consisting of Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Dr Khurshid Iqbal directed the defence and interior secretaries and other respondents to file their respective comments about three almost identical petitions of the convicts within a fortnight.

The petitioners requested the court to set aside their convictions by the respective military courts, arguing their sentences were unconstitutional, arbitrary and illegal.

Nine of the convicts, including Raheemullah and others, kept at the CentralPrison Bannu, have filed a joint petition against the sentences of 10 years rigorous imprisonment awarded to them by the Field General Court Martial (FGCM) in Kohat, which were confirmed by the con-cerned brigade commander.

These nine petitioners were arrested in connection with an FIR registered on May 9, 2023, at police station Bannu Cantonment, for attacking Bannu Cantonment during protests against the arrest of former Prime Minister Imran Khan.

Two convicts, including Sohrab Khan and Asadullah Durrani, filed a joint petition challenging the sentences of four-year rigorous imprisonment awarded to them by the FGCM for attacking the headquarters of Dir scouts in Balambat area of Lower Dir district.

Similarly, the two other convicts named Raees Khan and Ikramullah, field a joint petition againstthe sentencesoffouryears rigorous imprisonment awarded to them by the FGCM for their involvement in attacking Chakdara Fort against FIR was registered at Chakdara police station in Lower Dir on May 9, 2023.

Barrister Amir Khan Chamkani appeared for the petitioners and argued that from contents of the FIRs, none of the petitioners were directly charged therein, however during investigation they along with numerous other persons were charged for the said of fences.

He stated that the petitioners and some others were chosen for trial under the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, while others charged in the same FIRs including some accused persons directly charged in the FIRs, were tried by regularcivilian courts under the scheme of Anti-Terrorism Act.

He argued that the arbitrary choice, without any intelligible differentia, of selecting the petitioners for military trials literally sealed their fate.

Barrister Chamkani contended that when on the same set of evidence, the persons tried under the constitutional dictates of Article 10-A, dealing with fair trial, amongst other fundamental provisions were acquitted, the petitioners tried in absence of constitutional mandate were bound for conviction.

In an almost identical petition on July 1, a deputy attorney general had raised an objection about the maintainability of the petition, arguing that an alternate forum was available to petitioners but they failed to file an appeal within the limitation period of 30 days.

However, Barrister Chamkani argued that the remedy of appeal couldn`t be availed because petitioners were kept in the dark about the records of proceedings as well as the final conviction order.

He also referred to the Supreme Court`s May 7, 2025, judgement in the Army Act cases in support of his contention. That bench comprising Justice Wiqar Ahmad and Justice sadiq Ali had declared the petition maintainable before the high court and sought the relevant records.