The grant of a delay in the end of the examination of the Diaries of Section 497 Contempt Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 302 cuttle, clearly reveals that the defendant alone was delayed for the conclusion of the trial. Cannot be held liable, due to the absence of the accused by the jail authorities, or because the trial court was vacant and on other occasions proceeding to prosecute witnesses or to instruct the complainant. Was to present all witnesses to the court where the jail authorities failed to present the accused to a speedy trial or where The prosecution's testimony was not presented by the prosecution, the accused could not be held responsible for ensuring his attendance in court or seeking the prosecution's testimony that was beyond his control, but he was responsible for the trial. The trial court will prosecute the prosecution's witnesses in addition to the production of the accused, if any error was found by the jail authorities or the prosecution, the court was not helpless, but it was all appropriate under the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898. The entire trial to date has been conducted along with the guidelines provided under the National Judicial Policy, 2009 During the hearing, there was only one complainant and one. The prosecution's testimony was examined and the accused was in jail for more than three years. The prosecutor did not say that the accused was a previous culprit of the death sentence or life imprisonment, except for the hearing sought by him. The sentence was more than two years.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
