Muhammad Amir vs The State
This matter comes before the Sindh High Court upon a post-arrest bail application filed by Muhammad Amir against the State. At the outset, the learned counsel for the applicant stated that he did not wish to press the bail application provided that the trial court was directed to conclude the proceedings expeditiously. The Additional Prosecutor General for Sindh conceded to this request. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the bail application as not pressed while directing the trial court to conclude the case within two months from the receipt of the order and submit a compliance report through the Additional Registrar. The key principle established is that where a bail application is not pressed, the appellate or constitutional court may dispose of the matter while issuing binding directions to the subordinate court for the expeditious conclusion of the trial within a fixed timeframe to safeguard the liberty and right to a speedy trial of the accused.
- Whether a bail application can be disposed of as not pressed upon a request for expeditious conclusion of the trial?
- Can the High Court direct a trial court to conclude criminal proceedings within a specific timeframe upon the withdrawal of a bail application?
ORDER
1. At the very outset, learned advocate for applicant states that he would be satisfi ed and does not press this bail application, if direction is given to the learned trial Court to conclude the case expeditiously . Learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh concedes such request.
2. Accordingly , this bail application is dismissed as not pressed. However , learned trial Court is directed to conclude the case within two (02) months after receipt of this order and submit compliance report to this Court through Additional Registrar .