Sections 302 and 324 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), sections 19 and 39B of the Constitution of the Arts, Arts 9, 10 and 10A Qtl i amd, attempt to prove a crime by absent Qtl i amd , The suspects were arrested and charged, the defendant was prosecuted and subsequently the accused was convicted of drugs as absent, and after recording the evidence , He was sentenced and sentenced to death, he was not arrested long after the conviction. At the end of the verdict, the accused was arrested and filed an appeal to end his sentence. It is likely that the accused did not present himself in court due to lack of information and not intentionally to avoid justice, As per the accused, he was not aware of this fact. That a lawsuit has been filed against him. The question is whether the accused was aware of the case, or was unaware of it, could not be resolved without leading evidence on this part. For example, the accused was not punished according to the law, because the pre-conditions of the fair trial were not provided which were not in accordance with the procedure adopted by the trial court, Arts 9, 10 and 10A of the Constitution. When there was no blame. The prosecution was not led by the prosecution and the deliberately fugitive was not prosecuted, the punishment would be against the principles of justice that the recorded punishment against the accused would not be permanent, in which case the appropriate procedure would be adopted. The defense was presented to the court itself for deliberately punishing the accused on both of those charges - absenteeism.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015
