Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF versus STATE

Section 497 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 9595; bail, delay in administration of trial, was arrested mechanically on 1 1 2004 by trial court effect accused / applicant. The charge was fixed on 16 6 2004. Directive 31 2007 was issued to complete the trial on or before 2007, yet the case was pending fire and the prosecution failed to produce a single witness and delayed the trial. Was gone, the prosecution could not have worked without the fault being attributed to the accused. The witnesses were allowed to adopt a relaxed attitude and keep the accused in jail at the expense and cost of the treasury, which was retained by the people through indirect taxation without any undue delay. The hearing mechanism was designed to appear as if the immediate trial had failed and neither the prosecutor nor the agency presenting the proceedings were alive to perform their duties, nor were they willing to prescribe. The officers barely see the action and act as useless spectators, perhaps on their shoulders Let's ignore the sacred duty. Failing to manage justice and refusing mechanical delay, he was granted bail on bail. property advocates from Sialkot lawyer