MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs THE STATE
The petitioner, Muhammad Aslam, sought leave to appeal against an order of the Federal Shariat Court, which had dismissed his revision petition regarding the forfeiture of a surety bond. The petitioner and another individual had stood surety for an accused, Taoos Khan, facing trial under the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979. Following the accused's absence and subsequent declaration as a proclaimed absconder, the Sessions Judge forfeited the surety bonds. The petitioner contended that the accused had died shortly after his initial absence and that the accused's prior absence was due to illness, arguing that the forfeiture of the entire bond amount was excessive in these circumstances. The Supreme Court of Pakistan considered whether the forfeiture of the entire surety bond amount was justified given the evidence of the accused's death and the mitigating circumstances surrounding his absence. Finding that the question of whether the full bond amount should have been forfeited required further examination, the Court granted leave to appeal specifically on this issue.
- Whether the entire amount of a surety bond should be forfeited when the accused dies shortly after becoming absent from court?
- Does the death of an accused person constitute a valid ground for mitigating the forfeiture of a surety bond?
- Article 3/4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979
- Section 514, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' MAULANA MUHAMMAD TAQI USMANI, J.---The petitioner alongwith another person, namely. Gul Khan, stood sureties for an accused person Taoos Khan who was facing trial under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979 in the sum of Rs,50,000 each. Taoos Khan, the accused person remained absent since 16-4-1987 and had been declared a proclaimed absconder. The learned Sessions Judge, Karachi West who was trying the aforementioned case passed an order on 30-8-1990 whereby inter alia he forfeited surety bonds, however, he issued a notice under section 514, Cr.P.C. Against the sureties to show cause as to why entire amount of bond deposited in the Court be not finally credited in favour of the Government of Pakistan. Both the sureties appeared before the learned Sessions Judge and on 2-2-1992 the learned Sessions Judge, Karachi West passed an order to forfeit the whole amount of the surety bonds. Both the petitioners filed a Revision Petition before the Federal Shariat Court who on 7-6-1992 dismissed their petition in limine. Gul Khan seems to be satisfied with the order passed by the Federal Shariat Court, but Muhammad Aslam the petitioner, seeks leave to appeal against that order.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that both the sureties had produced a Certificate to the effect that Taoos Khan the accused person for whom they stood sureties had died on 17-5- 1987. The learned Federal Shariat Court without going into the merits of the Certificate has relied on the fact that even earlier than the date of the alleged death of Taoos Khan he remained absent from the Court. The learned counsel contends that the period of his absence before his death does not exceed one month and it is on the record that he was suffering from disease, therefore, it was not adequate in the circumstances of the case to forfeit the whole amount of the surety bond.
3. ' After hearing the learned counsel, we feel that the question whether the whole amount of the surety bond should have been forfeited in these circumstances requires examination. Leave is, therefore, granted. On this point only.