HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Appeal No.180 of 2014

Criminal Appeal No.183 of 2014

Criminal Appeal No.194 of 2014

Present: Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto

Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi

Appellants: Sanaullah son of Shafi Muhammad (in Criminal Appeal No.180 of 2014)

Muhammad Arif son of Abdul Hameed and Kamran Khan (in Criminal Appeals Nos.183 and 194 of 2014)

Respondent: The State through Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan, Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh.

Date of Hearing : 29.11.2017

Date of Judgment : 06.12.2017

J U D G M E N T

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- By this single judgment, we intend to dispose of above mentioned three appeals. Muhammad Arif, Kamran Khan and Sanaullah were tried by learned Judge, Special Court-II (CNS), Karachi in Special Case No.679 of 2013. By judgment dated 30.05.2014, the accused was convicted under Section 9(c) read with Sections 14 and 15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and sentenced to six (6) years R.I. and to pay fine of Rs.30,000/- each, in case of default in payment of fine, they were ordered to suffer six months S.I. more. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.PC was extended to the accused. Against the aforesaid conviction and sentence appellant Sanaullah filed Criminal Appeal No.180/2014, Muhammad Arif and Kamran Khan filed Criminal Appeal No.183 and Muhammad Arif filed Criminal Appeal No.194 of 2014.

2. Appeals were admitted to regular hearing. During pendency of appeals, sentence of appellant Sanaullah was suspended vide order dated 27.10.2014 and sentence of appellant Muhammad Arif was suspended vide order dated 30.10.2014. It appears that after suspension of the sentence and release of the appellants, they failed to appear before this Court. Warrants were issued against them, which returned unexecuted by ASI Abdul Jabbar of P.S. Site, Karachi. Perpetual warrants were also issued against them vide order dated 04.05.2017.

3. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan, D.P.G. submits that after suspension of sentence, appellants have 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. It is proved that the appellants are concealing themselves deliberately after suspension of sentence and they have become fugitive from the law. 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. It is clear that the appellant has become a fugitive from the law, as since appellants lose some of normal rights granted by procedural as well as substantive law. This appeals are, therefore, dismissed on account of the above mentioned conduct of the appellants with a clarification that if the appellants are recaptured by the authorities or they surrender to custody then they may apply before this Court seeking resurrection of these appeals. 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