ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has suggested certain amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (CrPC) and the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for speedy disposal of cases. It has observed that frequent submission of adjournment applications is, in fact, one of the main causes of delay in cases.
“The number of cases in courts is increasing exponentially due to the increase in litigation in various fields. Generally, criticism and condemnation from the general public for the delays in the disposal of cases, particularly civil trials, are directed only before the courts, without recognizing that the parties and their lawyers are also equally responsible for such delays.
“Frequent submission of adjournment applications is, in fact, a major cause of delay,” said a 13-page judgment written by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar while heading a division bench.
The verdict says that a certain schedule is also required to be integrated into the CrPC, where much of the delay is solely due to non-submission of reports under section 173, CrPC.
“Even if the investigating officer files a report, the courts consume a lot of time in framing the charges.” [as] “It is not adequately regulated or controlled with any specific timeline for completing tasks: framing of charges, completion of evidence, and recording of defendant’s statements.”
The court noted that under Article 202 of the Constitution, a high court can make rules regulating the practice and procedure of the court or any court subordinate to it.
“In our opinion, it is a need of the hour, rather a pressing priority, to incorporate a proper case management system in a phased manner in the CPC, from the date of admission of the claim to its completion with dedicated timelines for stage-by-stage evaluation. stage: stage of the procedure that both the courts and the parties must comply with.
“In exercise of the powers conferred by Articles 202 and 203 of the Constitution, the High Courts can also frame and amend rules to make the system more effective and meaningful to their subordinate judiciary.”
The court said that mere criticism for the sake of criticism, whether for exploitation or profit-seeking, does not resolve the failures of any system unless concrete and sincere improvisational, inventive efforts are made to eliminate the deficiencies causing delays in the elimination of cases.
“Therefore, keeping in mind the first-in-first-out method, a new/separate chapter should be incorporated in the CPC under the nomenclature of “Case Management” with specific stage-wise timelines for each step of the procedure.
“[This should include] provision for the seniority of cases and deadlines for the disposition of interlocutory applications from the original stage to the appeal stage, and must be implemented across the board with criminal consequences for non-compliance, which may include, but are not limited to, imposition of costs”.
