- Trial Court did not complete the trial within the period determined by this Court — We find that there was a delay but do not find that there was any inordinate delay caused as some adjournments were made on the behest of defence — It was required by the trial Court in view of direction of this Court that it should have made efforts to complete the trial though it was little difficult keeping in view the long list of 22 prosecution witnesses — In a murder case even one witness consumes lot of time particularly eye-witness — Trial of such case becomes difficult to conclude within the period determined by this Court — The defence not only failed to point out rather sought adjournments which also contributed towards the incompletion of trial — Held: We are unable to hold that in the given circumstances there was a delay which could be termed as inordinate delay amounting to abuse of the process of law or a scandalous delay. Muhammad Nadeem Javed v. Nisar Ahmed Khan & another 2003 SCR 340 (B)
error: Content is protected !!