Waqas Azam vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 1127 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Waqas Azam VS State Ss. 324, 353 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, common intention, possessing illicit weapon, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Record showed that accused was arrested by police during patrolling and a case was registered for the crime---Thereafter the accused was granted bail by the concerned Trial Court and apparently there after he did not appear before the Trial Court and the case was then kept on a dormant file and the accused was declared a proclaimed offender---Subsequently, the accused surrendered before the Trial Court and was once again granted ad-interim pre-arrest bail, which was then dismissed and he was then prosecuted---as to the merits of the case and the main charge, the accused was acquitted, whereas, in respect of his abscondance he was convicted---No justification and reason were found to maintain conviction merely on the ground that after obtaining bail, the accused failed to appear before the Court and then absconded---In such view of the matter when there was no evidence against the accused on merits, except his abscondance, the said piece of evidence in isolation, if at all, was not sufficient to uphold the conviction and sentence---If an accused person absconds through which valuable piece of evidence is lost or concealed or allowed to be destroyed then he is not entitled for concession or benefit of doubt; but if an innocent person becomes fugitive from law or absconds for reasons beyond his control and ultimately such innocence is established by way of his acquittal, then at least, he was entitled for such benefit of doubt---Facts and circumstances of the case, wherein, the accused had appeared by himself before his conviction and trial demonstrated that though he had failed to regularly appear before the Trial Court after obtaining bail, but his intention was never so to abscond permanently---Otherwise, accused would have only sought relief by way of appeal after his conviction in absentia---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Waqas Azam vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 1127 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ