2024 PLP 689 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, J.

The instant Miscellaneous Application No.(S) 451 of 2022 has been filed by Mr. Hasnain Iqbal Minhas, Advocate for rehearing of Criminal Acquittal Appeal No. 24 of 2022, which was listed before this Court on 27.10.2022 and the same was disposed of in his absence and dismissed on merits with the following short order: "Called repeatedly, neither the appellant nor his counsel is in attendance. There is also no intimation or request for adjournment of the instant matter and came was the position on last date of hearing i.e. 26.05.2022, as such, we are left with no other option, but to peruse the record with the assistance of learned APG. The appeal being without merit is dismissed for the reasons to be recorded later on."

2. The reasons for dismissal were also drawn on 03.11.2022 and operating part whereof reads as under: "We have gone through the documents annexed with the appeal, which show that as per the complainant the alleged incident had taken place on 26.05.2021, whereas he reported the matter to police on 30.05.2021, i.e. after delay of four days that too without any plausible explanation. Perusal of the record further reveals that the accused/respondents have been nominated by the complainant through subsequent application, wherein the complainant again has failed to mention as to how it revealed to him that the accused/respondents had committed the alleged offence. Furthermore, the complainant, in his subsequent application has alleged that there was a dispute over property between him and the accused/respondents, as such, false implication of the accused/respondents cannot be ruled out of consideration; particularly when the complainant is inimical towards them regarding the said dispute over a piece of land. Though the complainant, in his application has also mentioned that besides them, other people of the area had also gathered at the spot, but again nobody from them moved forward to corroborate the version of the complainant. Similarly, no specific role of any nature has been assigned to the respondents and it has not been brought on record that as to who had made the alleged firing. Even otherwise, no recovery of crime weapon was effected from the possession of the respondents and there is also no direct evidence recorded against the respondents; therefore, in the absence of the same, no conviction could at all be recorded. The learned trial Court while exercising powers under section 249-A, of the Cr.P.C. has arrived at a just and proof conclusion while acquitting the accused/ respondents."

3. It is obvious from bare reading of the abovementioned operative part of the order that the same was passed on merits after taking into consideration the materials available in the case file. The request of the learned counsel for re-hearing of the case amounts to review of the order passed by this Court on merits. The learned counsel, it appears, under the guise of recalling, is virtually asking this Court to review its earlier order passed on merits.

4. Admittedly, no litigant has a right to abuse the procedure and the practice of seeking of continuous adjournments on flimsy grounds have gone like cancer corroding the entire body of justice delivery system as evident from the application moved by the learned counsel in the instant case which speaks as under: "It is respectfully submitted that the undersigned is pre-occupied due to personal affair at Karachi, therefore, is leaving for Karachi. That due to the above reason the undersigned is unable to attend this Hon'ble court which has already been scheduled w.e.f. 26.10.2022 to 28.10.2022. That but due to above reason the cases of the undersigned are required to be adjourn for another date of hearing."

5. The said application was presented before the Additional Registrar on 25.10.2022 i.e. one day prior to the date of hearing of cases and the same was also brought in our notice. However, it was not entertained for a number of reasons, firstly, there is no important work for an advocate then the appearance before the Court, secondly; merely mentioning that due to pre-occupation, he was unable to attend the Court, is not sufficient cause/ground for adjournment of the case; thirdly, the application was also not supported by any document; fourthly, he also abstained from appearance before the Court on last date of hearing i.e. 26.05.2021 due to strike observed by the bar association; fifthly, the main entrance of the High Court premises was blocked by the advocates on both the occasions, sixthly, he could have managed to assign the cases to his associates in order to help the judicial system towards speedy disposal of cases instead of causing hurdles by way of seeking unnecessary adjournments and lastly, he and one Nasir Marri, Advocate were the main characters behind the whole episode of strike an remained engaged in the process of negotiations with the high-ups of the High Court. We are afraid that the role of Mr. Hasnain Iqbal Advocate cannot be appreciated for the reasons that on one hand, he was motivating and leading the junior lawyers for observing strike, boycotting video link and blocking the main entrance of the High Court premises and on the other hand moving applications for adjournment of cases.

6. It is also imperative to state that after the establishment of the High Court of Balochistan, Constitutional (Fifth Amendment) Act, 1976, neither the rules of procedure have been framed for regulating the practice and procedure of the Court under Article 202 of the Constitution nor the rules of any other High Court have been adopted. However, as a common practice, such applications were usually presented to the Chief Justice, having exclusive jurisdiction to distribute the business of Court among various judges for purposes of disposal of cases. It is the Hon'ble Chief Justice who constitutes and decides about the composition of Division Benches or the Judges who would sit single. This is part of his administrative functions. In this Court, such powers were also delegated to the judges seized with the matters and the Registrar or Additional Registrar have nothing to do with the issue of adjournments and they are only required to place such applications either before the Hon'ble Chief Justice or the Judges seized with the cases. It is the Court to apply its mind, consider the facts and circumstances and take a decision whether an adjournment should or should not be granted.

7. It would be relevant to state that 385 cases are pending before the district Courts and 434 cases are pending in the High Court, Circuit Bench at Sibi, which can easily be disposed of within a week, however, due to continuous strikes of bar association for the last 3/4 months, the same are pending adjudication. Continuous calling of strikes by different bar bodies on petty matters throughout the province has become a common practice and it has brought the sub-ordinate judiciary in between devil and deep see because on one side the High Courts are pressing them hard to meet the targets vis-a-vis expeditious disposal while on the other side lawyers are not co-operating with them. Non-disposal of cases within reasonable time can have serious consequences for the exercise of justice in society, as captured in the legal maxim "justice delayed is justice denied" and it has also eroded public confidence in the legal system as well as creating unrest in the society.

8. Speedy and timely disposal of the cases is the right of every litigant but we have noticed in a number of cases that some of the lawyers after getting the interim relief of suspending the operation of impugned orders, remain absent on subsequent hearings and the Courts also grant such adjournments on flimsy grounds perhaps due to heavy cause lists. The facility of frequent adjournment available to the counsel on flimsy grounds is a facility which has been abused more often than not, so much so that interim orders once obtained have notoriously been found to have continued for a long time, particularly in financial matters. The litigants are facing hardships in the form of delay in disposal of cases. Besides the other factors, frequent and unnecessary adjournments on flimsy grounds are the basic cause of delay in disposal of cases. Such adjournments are often sought on the grounds i.e. counsel is busy before another bench; not fully prepared to argue the case and filing of frivolous applications just to protect the illegal interest of their clients.

9. We have noticed with great concern that the Courts are obliging such parties while granting continuous adjournments during the proceedings who wanted it to be extended to any length. Civil as well criminal cases remain pending for decades and sometimes innocent people-remain behind the bars for a long period on account of delay in disposal of their cases mainly caused due to frequent unnecessary adjournments. Such practice should be discouraged and heavy costs should be imposed. The trial courts while imposing costs should be careful because the costs should be realistic and not paltry while taking into account the harm which is being caused to the entire judicial system. Imposing heavy costs is the only way to deter the parties from seeking unnecessary adjournments. Needless to state that in case of showing sufficient pause, adjournment can be given that too for a short and reasonable period. For the discussion made hereinabove, the application being without merit is dismissed. JK/40/Bal. Application dismissed.