IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

Cr. Appeal No: D-94/2007

 

 

Present:-

                                                                        Mr. Muhammad Ather Saeed &

                                                                        Mr. Irfan Saadat Khan, J.J.

 

 

Date of hearing:                                             03-05-2010

 

 

Sadiq and two others:                                    Appellants.

 

 

Versus

 

 

The State:                                                       Respondent.

 

 

For the Appellants in this Appeal:               Mr. Amanullah G. Malik, Advocate.

 

 

For the Appellants in

Cr. Appeal No.95/2007:                               Miss Rizwana Jabeen Siddique,

                                                                        Advocate.

 

For the Applicant in

Cr. Revision No. 108/2007:                        Mr. Shamsuddin Kobhar,

                                                                        Advocate.

 

 

For the State:                                                 Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi,

                                                            Deputy Prosecutor General.

 

 

 

J U D G M E N T

 

 

Muhammad Ather Saeed, J--- On 28-04-2010, we had, after hearing all the learned Counsel at length, decided to remand the case back to certain Sessions Court with certain directions.

 

                        The basic reason for such decision was that it had been pointed out to us by Mr. Shamsuddin Kobhar that he had applied to this Court for early disposal of the case by the Sessions Court and this Court had directed the Sessions Court to decide the issue and dispose of the case within 04 months. He further submitted that he had filed an Application for reopening his side and allowing him to present the two I.Os for their Depositions.

 

                        Mr. Mushtaque Hussain Shah also said that it was necessary that the 2 I.Os may be presented for examination so that his right to cross-examine may not have extinguished. Even otherwise, certain minor even major discrepancies were also pointed by all the learned Counsel in the Impugned Judgment, therefore, all the learned Counsel had submitted that they will be satisfied if the matter is remanded back to the learned Trial to allow the Prosecution to present I.Os Abdullah Leghari, Kalam Abbas Shah, HC Ghulam Hyder and ASI Mohammad Ashraf Jat.

 

                        The learned Trial Court is directed to examine the above named I.Os and the author of the FIR and provide a chance to the Accused/Appellant to cross-examine such I.Os and the author of the FIR and then on the basis of evidence available with it, pass an order afresh after giving all the counsel an opportunity to make their arguments. This exercise is directed to be completed within a period of 04 months but with directions that short dates may be allowed and the directions of this Court may not be used as an excuse to again pass sketchy and non-speaking order.

           

                        With these directions, this case is remanded back for passing de novo order in accordance with above directions.

 

                        Since we have remanded back the order and the Appellants have been in Jail for almost 04 years and 05 of them had already been allowed bail before passing of the order which has been set aside, therefore, without going into the merits of the case, the Appellants are admitted to bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lac Fifty Thousand) each and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

                       

                                                                                                Judge

 

 

                                                                                    Judge

Rashid