ABDUL HAMID ZARGAR Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS and respondent No.2 are facing trial before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Kathua for commission of offence punishable under Section 3/25 Arms Act,4/5 Explosive Substances Act, 419/34 RPC. PETITIONERS seek transfer of the case to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Srinagar.

(2.) THE first grievance projected is that the right of speedy trial is impeded. In seven years time only seven witnesses have been produced and examined, despite such tardy pace in producing the witnesses, the trial court has not closed the prosecution evidence.

(3.) INTERIM orders recorded from time to time by the trial court would indicate that various schedules have been fixed for production of the witnesses but of no use. It appears that if orders have been recorded and schedules have been fixed for production of the witnesses simply in the name of fixing schedules, no seriousness has been exhibited in pulling up the prosecution for its slackness in producing the witnesses. As a tip of iceberg, it shall be relevant to quote order recorded by the trial court on 5.4.2011 wherein it is provided that on 20.5.2011, 21.5.2011, 23.5.2011 and 24.5.2011 prosecution witnesses shall be produced. When the case has been taken up on 20.5.2011 no witness has been produced nor any cause of non production has been shown. Similar is the position recorded on 21.5.2011, 23.5.2011 and 24.5.2011 except trial court on 24.5.2011 has recorded that last opportunity is granted to APP for production of the witnesses and for production of the witnesses schedule has been fixed from 6.7.2011to 9.7.2011.