Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 303-Q of 1981, decided on 2nd February, 1982.

- S. 561---A--Quashment of proceedings---Prosecution Agency and Process Serving Agency grossly negligent in procuring attendance of co-accused despite rise of coercive provisions of Cr. P. C. and case hanging fire for last 5 years without any progress-Charge against petitioner and co-accused however, quite serious, for having been indicted for offences under S. 307/435/440/148/149, P. P. C.---Held : Although a case of great hardship, nevertheless, complainant who suffered at hands of petitioner not at fault and as such no case for quashment of proceedings made out, in circumstances-Trial Court, however, directed to try petitioner separately and complete proceedings within 3 months.

Sh. Muhammad Nawaz for Petitioner.

Sh. Riaz Ahmad, A.-O. with Abid-ur-Rehman for the State.

The petitioner seeks quashment of the proceedings pending against him in the Court of Mr. Sardar Ali Gorsi, M. S. 30, Lahore since 10th July, 1976. It is contended that-

(a) the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely involved ;

(b) the proceedings are pending in the Court since 5 years ;

(c) the case has been adjourned for hundred times (the learned counsel has stated at bar that since after the filing of petition, the case has been adjourned for five times) ;

(d) in spite of the fact that such a long time has passed and case came up for hearing for about 105 times, no progress has been made. What to speak of concluding the evidence, even the evidence has not so far been summoned.

2. It is submitted that in view of this inordinate delay the petitioner has already suffered a lot, therefore, the proceedings pending against him be quashed.

3. A report was called from the trial Court. Copies of the order sheets containing the interim orders was also sent for. According to the report, the evidence could not be recorded because the co-accused, in spite of summons, bailable warrants and non-bailable warrants, were not produced. As attendance of all the accused had not been procured, there fore, further proceedings to record evidence and proceed with the trial could not be initiated in spite of use of coercive provisions of the Cr. P. C.

4. There is no doubt that this is a case of hardship but the allegations are very serious. The complainant who has suffered is also not at fault. It is a case of eye-witness account and on merits, for the present, a case for quashment of proceedings is not made out. However the trial Court is directed to try the petitioner separately resorting to the provisions of the Cr. P. C. As a matter of fact, the trial Court should have done it earlier. In view of such a long time already passed, it is directed that the trial of the case against the petitioner should be concluded within three months after the receipt of this order.

5. Before parting with the case, I cannot restrain myself from obser ving that the prosecution agency and the process serving agency i. e. Police has, for reasons best known to them, acted with gross negligence. In this case twice summons were issued for the production of the remaining accused, once bailable warrants were issued, on 82 dates of hearing, non- A bailable warrants were issued for the production of the accused, the trial Court on six various dates ordered that the official deputed to effect the non-bailable warrants should appear in Court, four times bailable warrants of the officials entrusted with the execution of the non-bailable warrants were issued, even they never turned up. This is most reprehensive, if this is how the orders of the Courts are to be carried out, I wonder, if Courts will be able to function at all The matter requires stringent action against the concerned officials and a serious look after of the process serving agency. Above all this, the beauty of the situation is that the accused against whom summons, warrants and non-bailable warrants were issued are residents of Lahore. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Inspector- General of Police, Punjab. Lahore and Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Lahore. It is hoped that the action taken shall be intimated to the Court.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.