THE father of a Great Sankey schoolgirl found dead after refusing an arranged marriage has failed in a High Court fight to overturn a coroner’s finding that his daughter was “unlawfully killed”.

The battered body of 17-year-old Shafilea Ahmed was found by workmen on the banks of the River Kent, near Sedgwick, in the Lake District, 90 miles from her home in Liverpool Road in February 2004.

After her death, police initially worked on the theory that she had been the victim of an honour killing and arrested and questioned her parents, Iftikhar and Farzana Ahmed, on suspicion of kidnapping.

But a Crown Prosecution Service investigation found there was no chance of anyone being convicted on the evidence available.

The Bradford-born student had last been seen five months earlier, on the evening of September 11, 2003, as she left her part-time job at a call centre.

A few months earlier, she had refused an arranged marriage and during a visit to Pakistan to meet a prospective husband, had downed a bottle of caustic soda and spent 10 weeks recovering in Warrington Hospital.

During the inquest in January 2008 a friend of Shafilea and a council housing officer both said the teenager had told them that her had parents beat her in the months before her disappearance.

South Cumbria Coroner, Ian Smith, recorded a verdict of “unlawful killing”, saying he was “convinced” that Shafilea had been “taken from her home” on September 11 or 12, 2004 and “quickly disposed of” having been the victim of a “vile murder”, but that he had no idea who the killer was.

Yesterday in London lawyers representing Iftikhar Ahmed criticised the procedure and conclusion and asked a top judge, Mr Justice Irwin, to overturn the verdict.

Mr Ahmed’s barrister Michael Hartman said the coroner had been wrong to rely on police statements and had breached coroners’ rules by impliedly incriminating Mr Ahmed.

He argued that the coroner had failed to sufficiently inquire into whether Shafilea was murdered, suicidal or a victim of a tragic accident and said the coroner and police had not handed over all the evidence that related to their daughter’s death when asked.

Mr Smith had said he would consider a more specific request for documents but no such request was made.

Mr Justice Irwin said that while it would have been “preferable” for at least some disclosure to be made, it was a matter for the coroner to decide.

He said he would not order a fresh inquest because even now that more material had been disclosed Mr Ahmed’s lawyers were “unable to show that there would have been any material difference to the outcome”.

He added: “I find there is absolutely no basis in any of the points to suggest there was apparent bias, much less actual bias, to show there was any lack of proper inquiry, to show there was any inappropriate incrimination of Mr Ahmed or anyone else, or any perversity in the findings of fact as to how the deceased came by her death.”

Although there had been an initial allegation of bias made against the coroner, based on claims that he was too close to police, that was dropped prior to this week's hearing.