A STUDENT jailed for life for the murder of her lover's pregnant teenage wife has failed in a bid to persuade judges that her trial was unfair.

Sana Ali, aged 17, who was 11 weeks pregnant, suffered 46 knife wounds, mainly in her abdomen, at her home in Throstle Grove, Brandlesholme, Bury, on May 11, 2007.

She suffered a collapsed lung and bled to death by the time she was discovered and taken to hospital by members of her family two hours later.

Harmohinder Kaur Sanghera, aged 24, a Birmingham University dentistry student who had been having a two-year long-relationship with Sana's Muslim husband, Sair Ali, was arrested for the killing, after it was found that she visited the house on the day the teenager was butchered.

It was argued by the Crown at trial that she had killed her young rival out of "jealousy and desperation" after learning of her pregnancy and that Sair Ali's family would never bless a relationship between him and Sanghera because of the religious divide between them.

Sanghera protested that Sana was fine when she had left her home but was convicted of murder at Manchester Crown Court in November 2007 and jailed for life.

Sanghera, of Monestry Drive, Solihull, West Midlands, last week appealed against the "safety" of that conviction before Lord Justice Dyson, Mr Justice Ouseley and Judge Michael Mettyear at London's Criminal Appeal Court.

Michael Birnbaum QC, for Sanghera, argued that, whilst cell site evidence of mobile phone calls had been put before the jury as evidence that her visit to Sana's home was within the "window of opportunity" during which the killing was carried out, they had not been shown the whole picture.

He told the court that the fact that a text on her phone had been opened after Sanghera was said to have killed her rival had not been put before the jury and that omission could have seriously effected the credibility of Sanghera's defence in their eyes.

Mr Birnbaum also argued, amongst other things, that the judge at trial had misdirected the jury in important respects.

Lord Justice Dyson dismissed the criticism of the judge's directions to the jury saying: "In our judgement there was no misdirection. Alternatively, if there was, it was of no significance.

"The judge gave an impeccable general direction on the evidence. In our judgement there is nothing in this ground of appeal."

Turning to the evidence of the opened text message, the judge added: "It is not disputed by the Crown that, if Sana had opened the text, Sanghera could not have been the killer.

"However the text could have been opened by the appellant or by accident.

"The proposition that Sana opened the text message was wholly unrealistic.

"The fact that the text was opened was unremarkable. If this material had ben deployed before the jury, it could not have assisted them."

The judge also dismissed other arguments put forward on Sanghera's behalf and concluded: "The evidence against the appellant was very strong indeed.

"We are unpersuaded that there is force in any of the grounds."