| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 3438 2003 SLD 3438 2003 PLD 262 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 53-Q of 2002, decided on 10th December, 2002.
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND, JAVED IQBAL, JJ
Tariq Mahmood, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehta W.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Salah-ud-Din Mengal, Advocate General, Balochistan for the State.
Criminal Petition No. 53-Q of 2002, decided on 10th December, 2002.
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND, JAVED IQBAL, JJ
Tariq Mahmood, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehta W.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Salah-ud-Din Mengal, Advocate General, Balochistan for the State.
HAJI MUHAMMAD
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----Ss. 21-L & 19(10)---Prerequisites for conviction of accused in absentia--Accused can be convicted/sentenced under S.21-L of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, if he absconds and avoids arrest or evades appearance before any inquiry, investigation or Court proceedings or conceals himself and obstructs the course of justice, but before awarding him punishment Court is required to satisfy itself according to S.19(10) of the said Act that such absence of the accused is deliberate. (b) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----S. 21-L---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Trial Court initially being satisfied with the deliberate absence of accused convicted and sentenced him, but later on being satisfied on the basis of the documentary evidence that his abscondence was not deliberate, it accepted his plea and set aside his conviction, as a result whereof he was put to, face trial of the main case---Trial Court had kept the said sentence of accused intact which was unwarranted because conviction was followed by the sentence and if conviction was not sustainable then the sentence also could not be allowed to remain intact, otherwise presumption would be that the plea put forward by the accused for not attending the Court was not found to be acceptable--prosecution had even failed to establish accusation against the accused in the main case and inference could conveniently be drawn that he was not involved in the commission of offence, as such recording conviction in his absence in terms of S.21-L of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, was also illegal---Petition for leave to appeal was consequently converted into appeal and allowed and the impugned was set aside. (c) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)---- ----Ss. 21-L & 19(10)---Conviction of accused in absentia---Provisions to be followed strictly ---Conviction/sentence in the present case was recorded without providing accused opportunity of hearing and believing the statement of prosecution---Where an accused is convicted/sentenced in absentia, Court is bound to follow the relevant provisions of law strictly. ORDER IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---This petition…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492