ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Criminal Revision Application No.205 of 2021

(Mansoruddin Ahmed vs. The State)

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

1. For orders on office objection at A

2. For hearing of case

3. For hearing of M.A.No. 9786/2021

28.09.2022

Mr. Liaquat Ali Meyo advocate for applicant

Mr. Khadim Hussain Addl.P.G for the State

-.-.-.-.-.-.-

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- Facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Revision Application are that the applicant was convicted under Section 489-F PPC and sentenced to undergo R.I for 03 years with fine of Rs.30,000/- and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days, for issuing a cheques, which subsequently was bounced by learned Judicial Magistrate-XVIII, Karachi South, vide judgment dated 19.02.2020, which he impugned by preferring an appeal, it was dismissed by learned VIII-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South on account of failure of appellant and his counsel to pursue the same vide judgment dated 30.07.2021, which is impugned by the applicant before this Court by preferring the instant Revision Application.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the appeal of the applicant has been dismissed by learned Appellate Court without considering its merits thereby the applicant has been denied right of fair trial. By contending so, he sought for remand of the matter to learned Appellate Court for disposal of the appeal of the applicant on its merit, which is not opposed by learned Addl. P.G for the State.

3. Heard arguments and perused the record.

4. The appeal once admitted to its regular hearing is to be disposed of on merit. If for the sake of arguments, it is believed that the applicant and his counsel failed to pursue their appeal before learned Appellate Court, even then such fact alone could not have been made a reason by learned Appellate Court for recording dismissal of the appeal of the applicant abruptly without considering its merits, such exercise obviously has prejudiced the applicant in his defence seriously, which is against the mandate contained by Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, which prescribes right of fair trial.

5. In case of Muhammad Ashiq Faqir vs. The State (PLD 1970 S.C 177), it has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court that;

“The provisions relating to appeal are contained in Chapter 31 of the Code. Section 419 provides that every appeal shall be made in the form of a petition in writing presented by the appellant or his pleader, and every such petition shall be accompanied by a copy of the judgment or order appealed against. Under section 421 the appellate Court on receiving the petition and copy under section 419, shall peruse the same and if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, it may dismiss the appeal on merit. Provided that no appeal shall be dismissed unless the appellant or his pleader has had a reasonable opportunity of being heard in support of the appeal." The succeeding section 422 provides for notice to be given to the appellant or his pleader and to such officer as the Provincial Government may appoint in this behalf. Under section 423 if the appeal is not dismissed under section 421, the appellate Court shall after the issue of notice, send for the record of the case, if such record is not already in Court, and after perusing such record and hearing the appellant or his pleader, if he appears and the Public Prosecutor, if he appears, the Court may, if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, dismiss the appeal…..”

6. In view of above, the impugned judgment is set aside with direction to learned Appellate Court to dispose of the appeal of the applicant on merits by providing chance of hearing to all the concerned.

7. Instant Revision Application is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE