A man facing a possible jail term over a sexual assault in the early hours of Christmas Day 2015, will have to be re-sentenced after a court of appeal annulled the first judgment.

Najm Fahd, a 23-year old Syrian national, had been declared guilty by a Magistrates’ Court of having engaged in sexual acts with the 16-year old Maltese girl, held her against her will, assaulted her and ran on the streets creating a possible menace to third parties.

The assault had taken place close to 2am on Christmas Day when the teenager was returning home on foot after a private party at Baystreet.

Walking in the vicinity of Pembroke, the girl had described how she had sensed someone following her, hearing the clinking of some keychain in the background, before being grabbed from her coat by a stranger wearing a blue and white striped jumper.

He had first asked for directions to Ħamrun but had suddenly pushed her against the porch wall of a private residence and tried to force himself upon her, kissing and groping her before he was shoved backwards by the girl who managed to run away home.

The girl’s mother, upon hearing of the assault, had gone in search of the suspect, alerting the police when she finally came across a man who matched her daughter’s description chatting to another girl close to the former ITS premises.

The man, who told the mother that he was cold and wanted to get back to Ħamrun, had fled before the arrival of the police.

The alleged victim and her mother had later stepped forward when the girl said she recognised the suspect on television when his arraignment over separate charges had been covered by the media.

Mr Fahd had been charged over the Christmas Day incident and was ultimately declared guilty and condemned to a jail term of four years six months and placed under a two-year Protection Order.

However, the Court of Criminal Appeal, presided over by Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera, upheld the first argument raised by accused’s defence lawyer and declared that the first judgment was null owing to a technical error by the Magistrates’ Court.

The first court had cited the wrong disposition of law, quoting article 339(c) of the Criminal Code when it clearly meant to refer to article 339(cc) of the Code, an error which vitiated the judgment though not the entire proceedings before the Magistrates’ Court, stressed Madam Justice Scerri Herrera.

Consequently, the Appeals Court, whilst declaring that “the entire proceedings before the judgment were to stand”, sent the case back before the Magistrates’ Court so that Mr Fahd might be placed in the same position he had been before the judgment was delivered and ordered his re-sentencing under the correct disposition of law.

Inspectors Joseph Busuttil and Matthew Spagnol prosecuted. Lawyer Jason Grima was defence counsel.