Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 1004 2015 SLD 1004 2015 PCRLJ 1787
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1598 of 2015, decided on 16th September, 2015.
MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA AND FARRUKH GULZAR AWAN, JJ
Muhammad Zain Qazi for Appellant. M. Farhad Tirmazi, Senior Special Prosecutor for NAB.

Mian QURBAN ALI

VS

The STATE through Director-General, NAB

Law:

Section:

National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)--- ----Ss. 31-A & 32---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 10-A---Conviction in absentia---Principle of fair trial, applicability of---Limitation for filing appeal against conviction, commencement of---Date of knowledge of conviction---Accused was convicted in absentia by Trial Court vide order dated 2-9-2003, whereas, appeal against such order was filed on 10-9-2015---Plea raised by accused was that on 1-9-2015, when he was sent to jail on judicial remand, only then he got knowledge of order of conviction---Contention of the National Accountability Bureau was that appeal was barred by limitation---Validity---Provisions of S.31-A of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 were against the mandate of Art. 10-A of the Constitution---Accused did not participate in proceedings in reference filed against him, as such period of limitation was to be computed from the date of knowledge of accused which according to memorandum of appeal was 1-9-2015---High Court set aside the conviction and sentence awarded to accused in his absence---Appeal was allowed. Noor Muhammad Khatti and others v. The State 2005 PCr.LJ 1889; Muharam Ali v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1998 SC 1445; Writ Petition No. 4048 of 2010 and Writ Petition No. 2154 of 2010 ref. ORDER Questions the legality and validity of order dated 2nd of September, 2003, whereby the learned Judge, Accountability Court No.V, Lahore in Accountability Reference No.40 of 2002, due to non-appearance of the appellant and in pursuance of declaration as absconder, recorded conviction against him under section 31-A of The National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 (Ordinance XVIII of 1999) (Hereinafter called Act XVIII of 1999) and was awarded sentence of three years Rigorous imprisonment. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the pendency of Reference was not in the knowledge of appellant and he also did not receive any intimation through any source regarding the pendency of the Reference and as such his absence was neither intentional nor willful. 3. Questioning the legality and validity of order of conviction dated 2nd of September, 2003, it was submitted that the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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