HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Spl. Cr. ATA No.171 of 2015

Present: Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto

Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan

Appellants: Wali Khan son Ghulam Ali

Respondent: The State through Mr. Ali Haider Saleem, Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh.

Date of Hearing : 24.01.2018

Date of Judgment : 26.01.2018

J U D G M E N T

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Appellant Wali Khan son Ghulam Ali was tried by learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Court-V, Karachi in Special Case No.B-17/2014 (F.I.R. No.406/2013, registered at P.S. Mominabad SUI, Karachi under section 385, PPC read with section 25 of the Telegraphic Act and Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997). By judgment dated 31.07.2015, the appellant was convicted under section 385, PPC, read with section 25 of the Telegraphic Act and section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and sentenced to 5 years R.I. and to pay fine of Rs.30,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo SI for six months more.

2. Appellant filed the instant appeal, it was admitted for regular hearing. Sentence of the appellant was suspended vide order dated 21.09.2015. After release from jail, the appellant never appeared. Vide order dated 21.08.2017 bailable warrant was issued against the appellant and notice to surety in terms of section 514, Cr.PC. S.H.O. P.S. Mominabad returned the BW unexecuted with the endorsement that appellant has shifted to some unknown place. Notice issued upon surety was also returned unserved. SIP Javed Akhtar of P.S. Mominabad present in Court submits that accused is deliberately avoiding and he has become fugitive from law.

3. Mr. Ali Haider Saleem, learned D.P.G. submits that after suspension of sentence, appellant has absconded away and there is no probability of the arrest of the accused in near future.

4. We have heard the learned D.P.G. and scanned the record. Appellant is concealing himself deliberately after suspension of sentence and he has become fugitive from the law as per record. The law is settled by now that a fugitive from law and Courts loses some of normal rights granted by procedural as well as substantive law. The Honourable Supreme Court in the case of IKRAMULLAH AND OTHERS V/S. THE STATE (2015 SCMR 1002) has observed as under:-

9. A report dated 11.12.2014 has been received from the Superintendent, Central Prison, Bannu informing that Adil Nawab appellant had escaped from the said jail during the night between 14/15.04.2012 and he has become a fugitive from law ever since. The law is settled by now that a fugitive from law loses his right of audience before a Court. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed on account of the above mentioned conduct of the appellant with a clarification that if the appellant is recaptured by the authorities or he surrenders to custody then he may apply before this Court seeking resurrection of this appeal.

5. Record reflects that the appellant has become a fugitive from the law, thus as per the aforementioned dictum laid down by the Apex Court, the appellant has lost his right of audience before us. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed on account of the above mentioned conduct of the appellant with a clarification that if the appellant is recaptured by the authorities or he surrenders himself to custody then he may apply before this Court seeking resurrection of this appeal. Since notice under section 514, Cr.PC was issued against the surety, the same is returned un-served. Notice be repeated against surety under section 514, Cr.PC. Separate proceedings against surety shall be continued. Adjourned to a date in office for proceedings against surety.

J U D G E

Gulsher/PS