2010 PLP 375 (GBLR)
SHER AZAM and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 PLP 375 (GBLR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Appellate Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J. Syed Jaffar Shah and Muhammad Yaqoob, JJ |
| Parties | SHER AZAM and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 375 (GBLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 375 (GBLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Appellate Court bench comprising: Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, C.J. Syed Jaffar Shah and Muhammad Yaqoob, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 375 (GBLR) (SHER AZAM and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Haq Nawaz, Senior Advocate for Petitioners.
- Advocate General Gilgit-Baltistan on Court call.
- Keeping in view the facts and circumstance of the case we find that the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner for early disposal of the case by the trial court is genuine and we direct accordingly. The learned trial judge taking all possible efforts will conclude the trial within two months failing which the petitioner may repeat the application for grant of bail before the trial court, which will be considered on its own merits. In case trial is not concluded with the time specified, the learned Sessions Judge will explain the reasons to Registrar of this court for our perusal in Chamber. The learned Advocate General has stated that continuous absence of District Attorney from court is not explainable. The Home Secretary Government of Gilgit-Baltistan will look into the conduct of District Attorney and if due to his negligence, the delay in trial has been caused, the Home Secretary will take appropriate action. This petition with above observation/directions stand disposed off.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Counsel for the petitioners had submitted that trial was ripe for conclusion as except 2, 3 formal witnesses all other witnesses had been examined, but the District Attorney for the last six dates had not appeared in the court; as a result of which conclusion of trial was stuck off
Counsel had stated that instead of asking for the bail of the petitioner, he would request for a direction of conclusion of trial on priority
District Attorney for no good reason absented from the court and caused unnecessary delay in the conclusion of trial
Trial Court had also not taken any pains in conclusion of trial within reasonable time, as per direction of Supreme Appellate Court in Jail Reforms case
Prosecution could not be allowed latitude to prolong the trial at the cost of agony of accused who were in jail since the date of registration of case against them
Trial Court was required to examine using coercive measures for the attendance of the witnesses, to conclude the trial on priority
Request of the counsel for the petitioner for early disposal of the case by the Trial Court being genuine, Supreme Appellate Court directed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
The learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset submitted that trial is ripe for conclusion as except 2, 3 formal witnesses all other witnesses have been examined but the District Attorney for the last six dates has not appeared in court as a result of which the conclusion of trial is struck off therefore instead of asking for the bail of petitioners, he would request for a direction of conclusion of trial on priority. The perusal of the record would show that learned District Attorney for no good reason absented from the court and caused un necessary delay in the conclusion of trial. The learned trial judge also has not taken any pain in conclusion of trial within reasonable time as per direction of this court in jail reforms case. The prosecution cannot be shown latitude to prolong the trial at the cost of agony of accused, who are in jail since the date of registration of case against them. The learned trial judge using coercive measures for the attendance of the witnesses required to be examined by the prosecution must conclude the trial on priority. Keeping in view the facts and circumstance of the case we find that the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner for early disposal of the case by the trial court is genuine and we direct accordingly. The learned trial judge taking all possible efforts will conclude the trial within two months failing which the petitioner may repeat the application for grant of bail before the trial court, which will be considered on its own merits. In case trial is not concluded with the time specified, the learned Sessions Judge will explain the reasons to Registrar of this court for our perusal in Chamber. The learned Advocate General has stated that continuous absence of District Attorney from court is not explainable. The Home Secretary Government of Gilgit-Baltistan will look into the conduct of District Attorney and if due to his negligence, the delay in trial has been caused, the Home Secretary will take appropriate action. This petition with above observation/directions stand disposed off. H.B.T./37/Glt Order accordingly.