Pakistan Case Law
2008 P Cr. L J 431

ARBELO vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2008 P Cr. L J 431
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Criminal Bail Application No,99 of 2007
Date2007-05-07
Judge(s)Munib Ahmed Khan
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a bail application filed by the applicant, Arbelo, before the Sindh High Court. The applicant sought bail after a previous application was dismissed by the trial court. During the proceedings, it was highlighted that the trial court had remained vacant for approximately six months, causing significant delay in the trial process. The State opposed the bail application on its merits but did not object to the transfer of the case to another court to expedite proceedings. The Court, noting the vacancy of the trial court, directed the Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, to recall the case file and either preside over the case personally or assign it to another Additional Sessions Judge. The Court further ordered that the abductee, Mst. Badsha, be examined first, followed by the complainant, with the trial to be concluded expeditiously within four months. The bail application was disposed of with the observation that the applicant may renew the bail request before the trial court following the completion of these procedural steps.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a High Court direct the transfer of a case file from a vacant trial court to another judge to ensure an expeditious trial?
  • Is it appropriate for a High Court to dispose of a bail application by directing the trial court to prioritize the examination of specific witnesses?
bail applicationexpeditious trialtransfer of casetrial court vacancycriminal procedure

ORDER

1. MUNIB AHMAD KHAN, J.--- After arguing to some extent, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has repeated bail application before the trial Court but it has been dismissed and now the trial Court is lying vacant for the last about 6 months. Mr. Ghanght a has opposed the bail application on merits but has no objection if the transfer of the case is considered. In the circumstances, the Sessions Judge, Shikarpur is directed to recall the case file from the trial Court and either to continue himself with the case or may assign it to any other Additional Sessions Judge. Both the learned counsel agreed that the abductee Mst. Badsha is to be examined first and thereafter the complainant is to be examined. This exercise is to be done expeditiously and if possible within a period of 4 months whereafter the applicant may move the bail application before the trial Court. With this observation, bail application stands disposed of.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.