2 Crl. App. No.01-2019 matter in light of decision of this Court reported as ‘Inam ur Rahiem Vs. Chairman, National Accountability Bureau, Islamabad and another’ (PLD 2018 Islamabad 251). It was contended that exceptional circumstances exist in the instant matter, as the appellant is indisposed and as per the medical certificates appended with the application, he is unable to travel. It was further contended that in light of decision of Hon’ble Lahore High Court reported as ‘Muhammad Nawazish Ali Vs. Election Commission of Pakistan’ (2018 CLC 1301), an absconder retains his fundamental rights and can agitate proceedings in the matters other than in which he has been declared a proclaimed offender. Reliance was also placed on cases reported as ‘Gokuee S. Arora Vs. Govt. of Pakistan’ (2018 PTD 1856), Lahore High Court Bar Association and others Vs. General (Retd.) Pervez Musharraf and others’ (2019 SCMR 1029, ‘Malik Shama-ud-Din Vs. Muhammad Fayyaz and 2-others’ (2002 SCMR 1293) and ‘Ikram Ullah and others Vs. The State’ (2015 SCMR 1002). Learned counsel pointed out that if a person is fugitive from law, he does not lose all his rights and in this behalf, the main judgment on the issue is ‘Hayat Bakhsh and others Vs. The State’ (PLD 1981 Supreme Court 265). Reliance was also placed on cases reported as ‘Chan Shah Vs. The Crown’ (PLD 1956 FC 43) and ‘Muhammad Aslam Vs. State’ (1972 SCMR 194). Learned counsel took the Court through reminders and contended that the fact that a person has been declared a proclaimed offender, that does not absolutely debars his appeal being heard on merits. It was contended that there is no judgment squarely on the issue in hand but there is case law on either side that appeal can be heard on merits or otherwise, however, learned counsel pointed out that most of the case law by august