IQBAL HAJI TAYANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. B. M. Mangukia, the learned APP waives service of Rule. The petitioner Iqbal Haji Tayani, a Pakistaninational, who is facing trial for the alleged offences punishable under sections 307, 323 and 114 of I.P.C. before the learned Sessions Judge at Jamnagar, has by this Misc. Criminal Application moved this court for the early trial of his Sessions Case No. 113/91.

(2.) Briefly according to the petitioner, he is a Pakistani national and had corrie to Jamnagar on a short visit to attend the marriage of one of his relatives; As the misfortune would have been, some incident took place on 24/7/1991 at 15.45 hours on the basis of which one Iliyas Abbas Sumra filed a Criminal complaint against the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under sections 307,323,144 of I.P.C. and under section 135 (1) of the Bombay Police Act. The petitioner who, thereafter, was arrested by the Police, was released on Bail on 7/8/1991 by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar. Against the said order releasing the petitioner on bail, the complainant had preferred Criminal Application, the same being Misc. Criminal Application No. 2542/91, before this High Court for cancellation of Bail, which came to be rejected by an order dated 31/9/1991. Thereafter on 15/11/1991, the petitioner submitted one application before the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, inter alia praying for early trial of his case on the ground that his wife and three children were serving at Pakistan as he is held-up in India due to the aforesaid Criminal case pending against him. It is his further case that he is a poor man doing welding work at Karachi and there was none to look after his helpless family at present. This application of the petitioner came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, on the very same day on the ground that there were many such cases of under trail-prisoners pending before him and that the case of the petitioner was committed to the Sessions only recently. It is this Order of the learned Sessions Judge which is challenged before this Court reiterating in the prayer to fix trial at the earliest.

(3.) Heard Mr. Manoj Popat, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. B. M. Mangukia, the learned A.P.P. for the State.