2005 PLP 1283 (YLR)

Laws Cited

Representation

• Muhammad Sabir Haider and Sayed Taswar Hussain Rizvi for Appellants.
• Date of hearing: 8th November, 2004.
• ----Ss.302(b)/149 & 324/149---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Ss.25 & 19(12)---Appeal, competency of---Accused had been convicted and sentenced in absentia by the Anti-Terrorism Court and they had not surrendered either before the Trial Court or before the High Court---Absconders who had not surrendered before the Court after their conviction were not competent to file the appeal through their Advocate---Appeal filed by the accused through their Advocate, therefore, was not maintainable and was dismissed as such---Accused, however, were directed to approach the Trial Court as provided under S.19(12) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, for further proceedings in accordance with law.
• ----S.25---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302(b)/149 & 324/149---Appeal by absconders---Competency---Absconders who have not surrendered before the Court after their conviction cannot file appeal through their Advocate.
• RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.---The appellants Hassan Akhtar and Rizwan alias Abu Hashim, who were absconders, filed the present appeal through their Advocate Mr. Sabir Haider to challenge their conviction and sentence passed by the Anti-terrorism Court IV Karachi in special case No.53 of 2001. Under the impugned judgment, the trial Court convicted the appellants in absentia, under sections 302(b), 324, 149, P.P.C. and sentenced them to death and other imprisonments.
• The learned Assistant Advocate General raised a preliminary point about the maintainability of appeal on the ground that the appellants, who were tried in absentia, surrendered neither before this Court nor before trial Court. On the said point we have heard the Advocate for the appellants, A.A.-G. for the State, and perused the record of this case very carefully.
• The above preliminary point was thoroughly examined by this Bench in the case of Muhammad Jameel Ahmed v. State being Special Anti-terrorism Appeal No.99 of 2001 in which we took the view that the appeal filed by absconders who had not surrendered before the Court after their conviction could not file the appeal through their Advocate, therefore, the appeal was incompetently filed and not maintainable hence the same was dismissed. The facts and circumstances of the present appeal are similar to that of above-mentioned appeal. Therefore, the rule laid down in the said authority is fully applicable to this appeal.

Headnotes / Summary

Judgment & Decree