NATIONAL JUDICIAL POLICY
A.
1) In
future no chief justice or a judge of the superior court shall accept
appointment as acting Governor of a Province.
2) No
retired judge of the superior court shall accept an appointment which is lower
to his status or dignity including appointment as presiding officer of
(i) The Committee
asked the retired judges of the superior judiciary to maintain the highest
standards of decorum and voluntarily relinquish the charge of such posts which
are lower to their status to earn respect in public and uphold the principle of
the independence of judiciary.
(ii) The Committee asked the Secretary, National
Judicial (Policy Making) Committee to write letters to the Secretary,
Establishment Division and Provincial Chief Secretaries to relieve all such
judges and may not make such appointments in future.
(iii) As regards filling of vacant posts of
Judicial Officers, the High Courts should make necessary amendments in the
relevant recruitment rules enabling the High Court to conduct test/interview
for recruitment of judicial officers in the light of principles set forth in
the judgment passed by the High Court of Sindh in C.P
No-D2404/2008 (Rashid A Rizvi & others v/s
Province of Sindh & others).
3) Instead
of appointing retired judges/judicial officers as presiding officers of the
special court/tribunal, qualified serving judges be
appointed against these posts in consultation with the Chief Justice of the
High Court.
4) The High Courts may recommend the
serving Judicial Officers for appointment as presiding officers of special
courts by transfer or on deputation. However, where such appointments are
required to be made by direct recruitment then the same should be made from
amongst the highly qualified and experienced advocates.
5) Posting
of serving judges against executive posts in Federal and Provincial Government
Departments on deputation be discontinued. All such
judges should be repatriated to the respective High Courts, where their
services are needed most for expeditious disposal of pending cases.
6) All
special courts/tribunals under the administrative control of Executive must be
placed under the control and supervision of the judiciary, their
appointments/postings should be made on the recommendation of the Chief Justice
of concerned High Court.
(i) For effective judicial control over such
courts/tribunals, the High Courts should critically examine their judgments
under its appellate jurisdiction. The special courts/tribunals such as Revenue
Courts, Labour Court, Custom Courts, Banking Courts, Anti Corruption Courts,
NIRC, Special Courts for Narcotics, Banking Courts, Drug Courts, Consumer
Courts, Federal/Provincial Service Tribunals, Environment Tribunals and Income
Tax Appellate Tribunals etc. are performing judicial functions thus these
should work under the supervision of respective High Court. In this regard the
Federal/Provincial governments should amend the relevant laws to bring the
judges and staff of the Special Courts in the purview of the respective High
Court.
(ii) The performance of
administrative staff of special courts/tribunals is not found satisfactory and
there are complaints of corruption against them; therefore, the Chief Justices
of High Courts through Registrars should ensure the implementation of the
National Judicial Policy as the same is also binding on such courts/tribunals
and take steps for eradication of corruption.
7) In
future the judiciary would avoid its involvement in the conduct of elections,
as it distracts the judicial officers from professional duty and complaints of
corrupt practices tarnish the image of judiciary.
The reputation of judiciary is at stake during election due to
involvement of vested interests groups, etc in corrupt practices. On the other
hand, it also adversely affects the judicial functions of the courts. Even
otherwise, the Conduct of General Elections Order 2002, Representation of the
People Act, 1976 and Local Government Ordinance 2001 do not contain any
provision which requires that the elections are to be held under the supervision
of the Judiciary. Therefore, in future, the Judiciary should remain aloof from
the process of election to focus on disposal of cases. However, in case of
request from the Government, the NJPMC would decide the extent to which and
form of help to be extended to Government in the conduct of elections. The
judiciary will continue to extend support and cooperation in adjudication of
election related disputes/complaints as provided under the law.
B. MISCONDUCT
The Judges of the superior courts should
follow the Code of Conduct prescribed for judges. They should take all steps
necessary to decide cases within the shortest possible time. As provided by
Article X of the Code of Conduct: “In his judicial work a Judge shall take all
steps to decide cases within the shortest time, controlling effectively efforts
made to prevent early disposal of cases and make every endeavor to minimize
suffering of litigants by deciding cases expeditiously through proper written
judgments. A judge who is unmindful or indifferent towards this aspect of his
duty is not faithful to his work, which is a grave fault”. Hence, the Chief
Justice of concerned High Court may report cases of violation of Code of
Conduct including incidents of unusual delays/inefficient performance to the Chairman,
Supreme Judicial Council for action.
The prime
duty of a judge is to present before the public a clean image of judiciary. The
oath of a judge implies complete submission to the Constitution and under the
Constitution to the law. Subject to these governing obligations, his function
of interpretation and application of the Constitution and the law is to be
discharged for the maintenance of rule of law. To be a living embodiment of
these powers, functions and obligations call for possession of the highest
qualities of intellect and character. Equally, it imposes patterns of behavior,
which are the hallmark of distinction of a judge among his fellow-men.
Therefore, the Committee asked the Chief Justices to report the violations of
Code of Conduct to the Supreme Judicial Council for appropriate action.
C. ERADICATION OF CORRUPTION
1) The
code of conduct for subordinate judiciary, framed by the
2) The
present mechanism for initiation of disciplinary action against corrupt and
inefficient judicial officers/court staff be improved.
In each High Court a Cell to be called “Cell for Eradication of Corruption from
Judiciary” may be established in the office of Registrar, under the supervision
of Chief Justice of High Court to entertain complaints with credible evidence.
Copies of such complaints may also be forwarded to the Registrar, Supreme Court
of
3) Action
should be initiated against those judicial officers/staff that carry persistent
reputation of being corrupt or have their life style beyond ostensible means of
income.
(i)
The performance of the District and
Sessions Judges should be monitored by appointing a judge of the High Court and
conducting surprise visits/inspection of the Courts.
(ii)
To curb the malpractices and corruption
of courts staff, Munshi/clerks of the lawyers and touts, a
“Committee” headed by the District and Sessions Judge and President District
Bar Association should be formed to entertain complaints against corrupt
officials for taking action against them under the Law.
(iii)
The Chief Secretaries of the provinces
should initiate steps for computerization of revenue record on the pattern of
(iv)
The concerned Secretaries of the Revenue
Departments may take necessary steps for eradication of corruption and
streamlining the functioning of Revenue officials/ departments by formulating
efficient policy within 3 months and forward the same to the Chief Justice of
the respective High Court for consideration in the meeting of NJPMC.
4) To
guard against the evil of nepotism, favoritism, corrupt means, etc, the MITs in High Courts may examine the judgments of the
judicial officers to detect incidents of corruption/improper conduct. All the
judicial officers of the subordinate judiciary may be asked to send copies of
the judgments including bail/stay orders for scrutiny to MITs.
5) Surprise
inspections be carried out by the Chief
Justices/judges of the High Courts to monitor the working of subordinate
judiciary. In this regard, Judges of the High Courts be designated for each
division/district on rotation basis.
6) The
District and Sessions Judges should also report about the corruption/
misconduct of their subordinate judges.
7) The
judge should himself write order sheets, interlocutory orders and register
petitions.
8) Appropriate
criminal cases under the relevant provisions of law may also be registered
against the judicial officers/court staff involved in corruption.
9) The
corrupt judicial officers be made OSDs and kept
against their post for the purpose of drawing salary only and disciplinary
proceedings should be quickly finalized.
10) No
judicial officer/official should be posted in home district and those remained
posted in a particular district beyond 3 years should be transferred to other
district.
The judicial officers shall not be transferred before completion of 3
years tenure at a station unless the interest of public or the institution
demands early transfer/posting.
11) Naib Courts having completed 3 months attachment with a
court should be sent back to their parent department instead of transferring
them to other court by rotation.
12) The
complaints of corrupt practices and professional misconduct against lawyers
addressed to the Chief Justice of High Court should be forwarded to the Bar
Council for action. The Council should take immediate action on such complaints
under intimation to Registrars of the concerned High Court.
(i)
To ensure appearance of Counsels in
cases before district judiciary, the senior lawyers should organize their
offices as law firms where they may train their juniors and entrust cases to
them for pleading independently. The Junior Advocates should be encouraged to
prepare and plead cases independently; this will help in curtailing the delays
caused by frequent adjournments on account of non-availability of senior counsel
or their engagement in superior courts.
(ii)
The senior lawyers should maintain
certain standard for themselves and may not appear before each and every Court
at District level.
(iii)
Lawyers must realize their responsibilities
and should put their best abilities in assisting the Courts while pleading
their cases so that their efforts may be culminated in early disposal of cases.
(iv)
Lawyers must rise to the occasion and
stop the practice of taking adjournments and using delay tactics for lingering
the cases. There should be a limit for taking adjournments in the cases. If the Judicial Officer
comes to conclusion that the advocate is purposely taking the adjournments to
prolong the litigation then the requests for adjournment may not be acceded to.
(v)
Lawyers should avoid to
engage in a case where another lawyer is already engaged as such act
would cause apprehensions for miscarriage of justice.
13)
Incentives should be given to the honest, efficient and hard working judicial
officers including advance increments and posting at stations of choice etc.
D. EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF CASES
SHORT TERM MEASURES
I. CRIMINAL CASES
1) In
bailable cases, grant of bail is a statutory right of
the accused; therefore, the court before which the accused appears or is
brought may immediately release him on bail, subject to furnishing of sureties
as provided under section 496 Cr.P.C.
2) Bail
application under section 497 Cr.P.C. with photocopy
of the FIR, duly authenticated by the Counsel, should be accepted and the court
shall call for record of the case on its own through
3) In
bail matters, notice to State for production of record shall not exceed beyond
3 days and all the Provincial Police Officers/Inspectors General of Police
shall issue standing instructions to the concerned officers to ensure
production of record without delay.
4) Bail
applications under section 497 of Cr.P.C. shall be
decided not beyond a period of 3 days by the Magistrate, 5 days by Court of
Sessions and 7 days by the High Court.
(i)
The Court should consider the principles set forth by the
Supreme Court (1996 S.C.M.R 973) while deciding the bail petitions of women
having suckling babies.
(ii)
To overcome the problem of congestion in Jails,
the court should exercise powers under section 497 Cr.P.C.
keeping in view the principles of grant of bail including the principle that if
the offence does not fall under the purview of prohibitory
clause, grant of bail is a rule and refusal is an exception.
(iii)
In case bail is rejected, the court should take
all possible measures for disposal of the case to reduce the chances of filing
of bail petitions before the higher courts. However, where the accused desires
to move the higher court, the trial court should provide attested copies of all
the relevant documents to avoid the chance of requisitioning of original record
from the trial court which hinders the disposal of case.
5) Applications
for cancellation of bail under Sub-section (5) of section 497 Cr.P.C. should be decided within 15 days by the courts
including High Court.
Grant of
bail or otherwise is the discretion of a court and should be exercised
diligently and once a bail is granted it should not be withdrawn unless an
opportunity is given to the accused.
6) In
Criminal Cases it is the duty of the police/investigating agency to submit Challan (Police Report) within a period of 14 days as
contemplated in section 173 Cr.P.C. In case of
non-completion of investigation, an interim report shall be submitted and in
such cases, the court shall not grant remand beyond 15 days period.
The prosecution should
strictly follow the Order passed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case
of Hakeem Mumtaz Ahmad and
other vs the State (PLD 2002 SC 590) and it should be
ensured that in future challans of criminal cases are
submitted within the stipulated period of 14 days as provided under section
173(1) Cr.P.C failing which action should be taken
against the concerned officers for non compliance.
7) Non-completion
of investigation and non-submission of Challans in
statutory period is a major cause of delays in disposal of cases. Since, Police
plays crucial role in administration of justice, therefore, the District Police
Officers may be asked to ensure that the police should conclude investigation
and submit Challans within the prescribed period of
14 days. They may be asked that the SHOs who fail to
comply with this statutory provision should be treated as inefficient officer
under the Police Order and the court may also lodge complaint under section 166
PPC against him. The DPOs should also submit list of
cases in which Challans are still pending for want of
investigation for inspection and passing appropriate orders by the District and
Sessions Judge.
8) No
judge should grant remand in the absence of accused and while granting remand
should strictly adhere to the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and principles laid down in the Hakeem Mumtaz case (PLD 2002 SC 590)
The District and
Sessions Judges should regularly visit Jails on monthly basis to hear the
complaints of the prisoners and issue directions for resolution of their
problems/difficulties and may release the prisoners involved in petty offences.
9) All
criminal cases punishable with imprisonment for upto
7 years registered after
For
disposal of freshly instituted cases within the stipulated period and to avoid
piling of cases, there may be practical difficulties but the same can be
overcome by extending court timings depending upon the workload. The extended
time could be utilized for writing judgments, framing of charge and other
miscellaneous work.
10) All
criminal cases punishable with imprisonment from 7 years and above including
death cases shall be decided within a period of 1 year.
Chapter XX
and XXII-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 prescribe detailed procedure
for trial of cases by Magistrate and the Court of Sessions to ensure fair trial
for the accused. Since this procedure takes longer time, therefore to finalize
the proceedings, the following measures should be adopted to cut short the
delays:
(a) On receipt
of Challan, the court shall immediately fix the case
and issue production warrants/notice.
(b) When the
accused is brought or appears before the court he should be provided with
copies of statements and relevant documents as provided under section
(c) Under
section 173 Cr.P.C, it is the duty of the concerned
SHO/ Investigating Officer to produce witnesses and case property before the
court during trial. Therefore, the court shall take all necessary measures to
bind the SHO/IOs to procure evidence on the fixed
date.
(d) All efforts
should be made to produce witnesses and the case property on the first date of
hearing.
(e) If no case
is made out or there is no probability of accused being convicted, the accused
should be acquitted of the charge under Section 249-A or 265-K Cr.P.C, as the case may be.
(f) The court
shall not grant unnecessary adjournments and if possible should proceed with
the case on day to-day basis.
(g) The court
shall take care that only relevant and admissible evidence is recorded.
(h) The
District and Sessions Judges should hold meetings with the jail authorities to
ensue the production of UTPs on the date of hearing
to avoid delays on account of non-production of prisoners.
(i) The court should take strict action against the parties or
witnesses causing deliberate delays in proceedings.
(j) The
judgments should be based on well founded reasons and acumen so that it not
only resolve the disputes but also lessen the prospects of future litigation.
(k) Delay in
disposal of criminal cases is mostly due to the non-cooperation of relevant
stakeholders of justice sector namely, lawyers, police and prison authorities;
therefore, the court should ensure that they may fulfill their legal
obligations to minimize delays and expedite trials.
11) Cases
relating to preventive detention under section 107 read with section 151 Cr.P.C. should be decided as early as possible by following
the procedure as envisaged under section 112, 117 and 118 Cr.P.C.
12) Production before court for
remand/trial is a statutory right of every prisoner; therefore, the District
and Sessions Judges should ask the jail authorities to ensure that the
prisoners must be produced before the court. The District and Sessions Judges
should also monitor that while granting remand all requisite procedural formalities
are complied with.
(i) During the hearing, the production of
prisoners / witnesses and other relevant evidence before the Court is the
responsibility of Prosecution/Investigation Agency; therefore, the concerned
authorities should discharge their responsibility without any failure or
slackness.
(ii) The Prosecution should procure the attendance of witnesses on
the date of hearing and the court must ensure that no witness should return
unexamined and the prisoner without any progress in his trial/case.
(iii) The trial Court shall not grant unnecessary adjournments
particularly on account of failure to produce the prosecution witnesses. If any Police Officer or Investigating
Officer of the case is found guilty of deliberate attempts to prolong the trial,
the trial Court may report the matter to the Officer Incharge
of such Police Officer for taking necessary action. If in any case it appears
that no action has been taken on the complaint the matter may be brought to the
notice of Chief Justice through Registrar for initiating contempt proceeding
against such Police Officer responsible for causing hindrance in conclusion of
trial. To discourage the tendency of taking adjournment on flimsy grounds, the
Registrar of the High Court may convey a meeting of the Inspector General
Police, Prosecutor General and Advocate General to chalk out a uniform policy
for expeditious disposal of criminal cases.
(iv) In appropriate cases where
complaints have been made against Police for misuse of authority, dishonest
investigation, negligence and inefficiency, the matter may be reported to the
Police Complaint Authorities and District Public Safety Commission for
initiation of disciplinary proceeding against the delinquents.
(v) In case the trial Court comes to conclusion that the Police
have viciously and unnecessary caused delay in forwarding the case to the Court
or to any other Authority to whom he was legally bound to forward any arrested
person may be proceeded against the responsible on account of misconduct and in
case of conviction he may also be punished with imprisonment for a term which
may extend to one year or with fine under Article 157 of the Police Order,
2002.
(vi) In the Office of the Provincial Police Officer /IGP, a focal
person may be designated to perform exclusively the duties of receiving the
orders from the Courts in connection with the trial of criminal cases and
dispatching it to the concerned quarters for compliance, particularly orders
regarding production of record and under trial prisoners in the Court on the
date and time fixed by the Court.
(vii) Sub section (3) of section 167 Cr.P.C.
requires that while granting police remand reasons should be recorded for doing
so after scrutiny of record and under no circumstances accused should be
remanded to police custody unless it is made clear that his presence is
actually needed for some specific purpose connected with the completion of
investigation. Moreover, sub section (4) of section 167 Cr.P.C.
requires the Magistrate to forward a copy of remand order with reasons for
making it to the Sessions Judge. Strict compliance of this provision would help
the Sessions Judges to supervise the action of Magistrates working under them.
(viii) Section 344 Cr.P.C. empowers the
Court to postpone/adjourn the proceedings and remand the accused person to
judicial custody upto 15 days; however, grant of
judicial remand in routine on “Robkars” in absence of
accused person amounts to violation of law. Therefore, it is recommended that
adjournments should not be granted unless necessitated in the interest of
justice and for the reasons beyond control.
13) In criminal cases, non-representation
of accused by Counsel is also a source of delay in trial, therefore, the Chief
Justices of High Courts, in consultation with the Chairman of the Legal Aid
Committee of the Provincial Bar Councils or Pakistan Bar Council, may appoint
lawyer in such cases to avoid delay. In this regard a list of the advocates
should be maintained in each district so that they can be appointed for provision
of legal aid to accused person who cannot afford to hire the services of
Counsels. However, prior to appointing any Counsel option of selection from
that list should be given to the accused in the interest of justice.
The Federal /
Provincial Governments may allocate sufficient fund for Pakistan Bar Council
and Provincial Bar Councils for activation of Legal Aid Committees functioning
under Legal Practitioners Act 1973 for paying the fee of advocates in deserving
cases. The funds for District Legal Empowerment Committees from share of Access
to Justice Development Fund (AJDF) be released on
priority basis to the High Courts so that the District Committees may provide
legal aid in deserving cases especially in murder cases or offences punishable
with death.
14) To check the tendency of filing false
and frivolous cases, the court should take penal action against the party by
imposing fines under section 250 Cr.P.C. or filing
complaints under section 182 and 211 of the PPC.
(i) False and frivolous litigation in civil
as well as in criminal sides be discouraged by imposing heavy costs,
compensation and penalties in accordance with the provisions of section 35-A
C.P.C and 250 Cr.P.C so that the precious time of the
Courts may not be wasted and utilized for redresseal
of genuine grievances of the litigants.
(ii) In cases triable by a Magistrate,
if the court discharges or acquits all or any of the accused and is of the
opinion that the accusation against them or any of them was false or frivolous,
the court may acquit or discharge the accused and may call upon the
complainant/informant to show cause as to why he should not pay compensation to
the accused. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case the
Magistrate may direct the complainant / informant to pay to the accused a
compensation not exceeding rupees twenty five thousand. The compensation
payable under section 250 Cr.P.C. is recoverable as
arrears of land revenue.
(iii) If this provision of the law is enforced in its true sense, it
would certainly help to reduce the number of groundless and frivolous
complaints/ cases .However, in fixing the amount of compensation, the court
should carefully consider the status of accused as well as that of the
complainant and the nature of accusation. Besides, if it appears to a court
that forgery or perjury has been committed in relation to any proceeding before
it then the court can proceed against the defaulter under section 476 Cr P.C.
to vanish the impression that anyone can abuse the process of law by falsehood
or fabrication and that too without any risk of prosecution. Before prosecuting
the accused it is essential for the court to consider whether there is a
reasonable probability for the conviction and is it expedient in the interest
of justice or not?.
(iv) Under section 476 of
the Cr.P.C. the court may itself take cognizance of
the offence and try it in accordance with the procedure prescribed for summary
trials in Chapter XXII of the Code. However, if the court considers that the
accused should not be tried summarily under section 476, it may after recording
the facts constituting the offence and statement of the accused forward the
case to the competent court for trial.
15) Under the Police Order 2002, the
Police Complaints Authorities and District Public Safety Commissions are setup
at various levels for enquiring into complaints against police regarding misuse
of authority, dishonest investigation, negligence and inefficiency. Therefore,
it is needed that in appropriate cases the Presiding Officers should make
references to concerned authorities for initiation of proceedings against the
delinquent police officers/officials.
(i) At District level, District &
Sessions Judges, DCO, DPO and District Attorney/Prosecutor and at Provincial
level Registrar, High Court, IGP and Prosecutor General/Advocate General may
hold meetings on monthly basis for monitoring the performance of investigation
agency, early completion of investigation and production of witnesses before
the court for quick disposal of criminal cases.
(ii) The Police Officers/Jails Staff responsible for
non-production of under trial prisoners before the Courts without any
reasonable excuse may be proceeded against under the Police Order, 2002 and
other relevant Rules.
(iii) The trial Court shall not grant unnecessary adjournments
particularly on account of failure to produce the prosecution witnesses. If any Police Officer or Investigating
Officer of the case is found guilty of deliberate attempts to prolong the
trial, the trial Court may report the matter to the Officer Incharge
of such Police Officer for taking necessary action. In case it appears that no
action has been taken on the complaint the matter may be brought to the notice
of Chief Justice through Registrar for initiating contempt proceedings against
such Police Officer responsible for causing hindrance in conclusion of trial.
(iv) The Federal and Provincial
Governments should take steps for the establishment of the National Public
Safety Commission at national and provincial levels for entertaining the
complaints of general public against the Police Officials.
16) Transfer
applications under section 526 & 528 Cr.P.C,
miscellaneous applications like Supardari of vehicle
and disposal of property under chapter XLIII of the Code and other applications
arising out of interim orders should be decided within 7 days.
17) In
murder references under section 374 Cr.P.C, the
practice of printing paper books be discontinued and photocopied books may be
accepted so as to avoid unnecessary delay in disposal of appeals for want of
printing of paper book.
18) To
address the issue of convicts including women languishing in jails for want of
payment of Diyat, Arsh
& Daman even after serving their entire period of sentence of imprisonment,
the Federal Government has already framed Rules, called the Diyat,
Arsh and Daman Fund Rules 2007. However, despite
lapse of considerable time the benefits of this legislation have not trickled
down to the deserving convicts. Therefore, the Provincial Chief Secretaries may
be asked to consider the cases of such convicts and make necessary arrangements
for payment on first come first-serve basis.
(i) The Provincial Government may also
explore possibilities for
creating other funds
through Bait-ul-Maal,
provincial charitable endowment, if any, and donations. Such funds shall be
maintained under proper accounting/auditing mechanism.
(ii) In order to alleviate the suffering of the prison inmates and
to provide the necessary food and other facilities according to scale prescribed
under Jail Manual, the Additional District & Sessions Judge on the first
Friday of the month the District & Sessions Judge on the last Friday in the
afternoon after Court timing may visit
to the jail and examine the record of production of prisoners, overall
situation of jail and to know the attitude and behaviour
of jail officials with the prisoners and submit a brief report to the Registrar
of the High Court by the 5th of ensuing month.
A consolidated report of such visits may be forwarded by the Registrar
of High Court to the Secretary, NJPMC for placing before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan/Chairman, NJPMC.
19. The Courts/Government should make use
of the Probation of Offender Ordinance 1960 as well as the Good Conduct
Prisoners Probation Release Act 1926 to extend benefits of the said laws by
releasing the deserving convicts on parole/probation in accordance with law.
(i)
For
effective use of these legislations the Committee recommended that:
(a) The Probation and
Parole Officers should be activated and be asked to visit jails frequently for
conducting inquiry and submission of reports to facilitate the courts and
provincial governments to consider the cases of deserving convicts.
(b) The Provincial
Home Departments should ensure the presence of Probation and Parole Officers in
jails during the visits of the Sessions judges and judges of the High Court.
(c) The Registrar,
Supreme Court/Secretary, NJPMC may convene regular meetings of the Registrars
of the High Courts and Home Secretaries to evolve strategies for effective
enforcement of the aforesaid laws.
(d) In proper cases
the Sessions judges should exercise powers under Probation of Offender
Ordinance 1960 or make recommendations to concerned government to extend favour to the convicts /UTP under Good Conduct Prisoners
Probation Release Act 1926, as the case may be.
(ii) The
jail authority may arrange education facilities for the adult prisoners and
those who passes 5th class examination may be given incentive of the
remission in their sentence on the basis of improvement in educational
qualification.
(iii) In
the monthly meeting of the Criminal Justice Coordination Committee the services
of the specialists may be co-opted for arranging special medical assistance to
the prisoners in routine.
(iv) Besides up-gradation and increase in salaries of the staff of
Prison Departments, the incentive of up-gradation and additional allowance
equivalent to one salary to the staff of the R & P may be extended to other
provinces in line with the
(v) There
is no provision in law to release the women prisoners having suckling
babies/children. Nevertheless it was agreed that suitable amendment in the
relevant law be suggested by the LJCP for remission of sentences or release on
bail of women having suckling babies/children.
(vi) To enable timely release of foreigners from jails on
completion of their convictions, the Home Departments should start the process
of repatriation much earlier from the date of their release. In case where delay
is on account of nonpayment of fine or fund to defray passage expenses, the
assistance of Philanthropist/UN agencies i.e. UNHCR and ICRC may be sought.
20) The
Registrars of High Courts should approach the Law and Justice Division to know
about the pending mercy petitions and copy of the list shall be submitted to
the Registrar, Supreme Court, who shall take-up the matter with the competent
authority in consultation with the Chief Justice Pakistan on priority basis. In
case of rejection of mercy petition, the Provincial Home Secretaries should
ensure completion of the process without unnecessary delay to maintain the
deterrent effect of the sentence.
21) Emphasis
should be given on quick disposal of Narcotics and Anti Terrorism cases, cases
of women and Juvenile offenders etc.
For early
disposal of ATA cases, the Committee recommended that the judges of the High
Courts and Supreme Court be designated to monitor and ensure compliance of
guidelines laid down in case of Liaquat Hussain vs. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1999 SC 504).
22) To
clear the backlog under different categories, special benches should be
constituted at Principal seat and Branch Registries of Supreme Court and High
Court to decide current/old cases by placing the prioritized ones on fast track.
II. CIVIL
CASES
1) Writ
petitions under Article 199 of the Constitution should be fixed for 'Katchi Peshi' on the next day of
institution and be disposed of as quickly as possible.
2) Writ
petitions of the following categories if competent under the law,
should be decided within 60 days:
(i)
Pertaining to service disputes including
promotion, transfer and such other matters.
(ii)
Relating to admission of students in
professional colleges and allied matters.
3) Stay
matter under Order 39 rule 1&2 should be decided within 15 days of grant of
interim injunction and in case of delay, the judicial officer should report
reasons to the concerned Chief Justice of the High Court through Registrar.
The
Committee considered the issue of frequent grant of temporary injunctions by
the courts without realizing the consequences and recommended that the
following instructions should be complied with strictly:
(a) All Courts
shall examine such applications critically and ensure that the interlocutory
injunctions should be granted ex-parte only in very
exceptional circumstances, unless the plaintiff can convince the Court that by
no reasonable diligence could he have avoided the necessity of applying for
unilateral order.
(b) Such
injunctions should be limited to a minimum time within which a defendant can
come effectively before the Court.
(c) It should
be noted that under Rule 2-A of Order 39, Code of Civil Procedure, an interim
injunction passed in the absence of the defendant shall not ordinarily exceed
15 days, provided that such injunction may be extended for failure of its
service on the defendant when such failure is not attributable to the plaintiff
or when the defendant seeks time for defence.
(d) The Court
should take greatest care to state exactly what acts are restrained instead of
copying the application, and if only one or some of the acts are sought to be
restrained, the injunction should be confined to that and should not hold on
other acts to which the defendant can possibly object.
(e) When the
defendant appears or files his reply/affidavit then the court should
immediately dispose of the matter without any adjournment and if it is not
possible the court should take an undertaking from the defendant to be
restrained from doing any act complained about.
(f) The Court
should not allow the abuse of injunction by common tactics such as non-service
of process or lingering on the period by seeking adjournments etc.
(g) An order of
Injunction made under Rule 1 or 2 of Order 39 after hearing the parties or
after notice to the defendant shall cease to have effect on the expiration of
six months unless extended by the Court after hearing the parties again and for
reasons to be recorded for such extension and a report of such extension should
be submitted to the High Court.
4) The
rent cases should be decided speedily within a period of 4 months.
(i) In rent cases, the details of the property, survey number,
locality and complete address of the respondents with a certificate/affidavit
to the correctness of that information shall be attached with the eviction
application.
(ii) It is
noticed that the provisions of rent laws are not properly understood,
appreciated and applied in proceedings by the Rent Controllers, therefore, the
Committee asked for strict compliance of guidelines given by the Supreme Court
of Pakistan in case reported in SCMR 2000 at page 556, which are as under:-
(a) Affidavits
of not more than two witnesses in support of the ejectment
application shall be filed in the Court in addition to the affidavit of the petitioner
himself in support of the contents of ejectment
petition.
(b) While
replying to the ejectment application the respondent
shall be similarly required to submit his own affidavit and affidavits of two
other witnesses in support of his affidavit on the date fixed in the notice
served upon him.
(c) The parties
shall be bound to produce their witnesses for purpose of their respective
cross-examination on the day fixed by the Court.
(d) A party
obtaining the affidavits of the witnesses in support of his petition/reply
would be bound to produce them in the Court for cross-examination and in case
of its failure to do so their evidence shall be excluded from consideration.
(e) Appeals
against the interim orders of the Rent Controller and resort to Constitutional
jurisdiction, against orders at intermediate stages arising out of the ejectment proceedings, should be discouraged.
(f) The Court
should take serious view of the situation when witnesses for cross-examination
in support of their affidavits deliberately avoid / evade appearance in Court.
(g) Adjournment
of ejectment petition should not be allowed except
under unavoidable circumstances on an application moved by a party supported by
affidavit. In such cases also adjournment should not be made for a period
exceeding three days. Following the above procedure in ejectment
matters appears to be necessary to achieve the goal of expeditious disposal of
a case within a period of three months particularly in respect of residential
tenements.
5) Appeals,
Writ Petitions and other miscellaneous petitions pertaining to rent matters
should be decided in 60 days.
6) Revision
petitions under CPC arising out of interlocutory orders i.e. interim stay
orders, mis-joinder and non-joinder
of necessary parties, appointment of local commissioners and non-payment of
court fee should be decided within 3 months subject to the maintainability of
such petition.
(i)
The Presiding Officer of the Court may
refer cases for recording of evidence through Commission subject to the consent
of parties by appointing the Advocate as a Commission. The fee of the
Commission shall be fixed with the consent of parties and their Counsels. The
evidence shall be recorded in the light of Order XXVI of the C.P.C. However,
the period for completion of recording of evidence shall not be more than one
week and the objections if any shall be decided by recording proper order.
(ii)
The Commission shall complete the
evidence within week and submit its report to the Court. It is desirable that
the Commission is appointed out of a panel of advocates having not less than
three years experience and good record of pleading of cases.
7) Family
cases should be decided within 3-6 months.
8) Civil
appeals arising out of family cases, custody of minors, guardianship cases, succession
and insolvency cases, if competent, shall be decided within one to four months and for any delay, reasons
should be furnished to the High Court.
9) Banking,
tax, duty, levy and cess cases should be decided
within 6 months.
10) Civil
Judges should decide review applications within 30 days and the trial of new
cases (instituted after
11) Negotiable
Instrument cases which are decided through summary procedure as provided under
Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 should be decided in 90 days.
12) Priority
should be given to women and juvenile cases for quick disposal.
13) The
Small Claims and Minor Offences Courts Ordinance 2002 should be applied in
earnest. The High Courts should designate civil judges cum Magistrates to try
exclusively cases under said law. Such judicial officers be
imparted training in ADR. For this purpose a Committee of judges of the High
Courts headed by a judge of the Supreme Court would arrange training in ADR for
master trainers who would later on train the remaining judges in provinces.
The Small
Claims and Minor Offences Ordinance Courts 2002 has
been promulgated for providing exclusive forum for facilitating the resolution
of small disputes. This law also provides for ADR mechanism for facilitating
the resolution and settlement of disputes outside the court system. This could
be transformed into an excellent forum for addressing backlog of cases, therefore, the High Courts should approach respective
provincial governments for establishment of more such courts to deal with the
cases under the provisions of Small Claims and Minor Offence Courts Ordinance
2002 exclusively.
14) In
the Supreme Court and High Courts, priority should be given to dispose off old
cases, except cases in which special orders were passed by court for fixation
of the cases on specified dates.
15) To
clear the backlog under different categories, special benches should be
constituted for each category on the Principal seat and Branch Registry of the
Supreme Court and High Court. There should be a commitment of judges to decide
the old civil/criminal cases (filed upto
16) Priority
should be given to the disposal of trade, commercial and investment cases. Such
cases should be managed on fast track through establishment of designated
courts and by constituting special benches by High Courts and Supreme Court.
17) Late
issuance of cause lists by the High Courts creates problems for lawyer/litigant
and parties to appear in court on short notice, which results in adjournments.
Therefore, to provide reasonable time to the parties to adjust their schedule,
the Supreme Court and High Courts should issue their cause lists one month in
advance.
18) The
District Judges should adopt such measures which ensure handling of 50% of
cases from backlog (filed up to
For
early disposal of cases, the courts should adopt the following measures:
(a) To cope with the problem of increasing litigation, it is
necessary that the courts shall carefully scrutinize the pleadings, record and
dismiss/reject false, fictitious and frivolous cases as provided under Code of
Civil Procedure 1908.
(b) The provision of Order 11 of the C.P.C. regarding discovery
and inspection should be applied properly to narrow down the controversies as
well as issues leading to recording of statement of fewer and relevant
witnesses.
(c) The parties denying documents that may be proved later should
be burdened with costs incurred for proving that document as well as incidental
costs.
(d) The courts should make use of section 89A C.P.C. to resolve
disputes through Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) including conciliation,
mediation and arbitration or any such other appropriate mode.
(e) The plaintiff should be obligated to provide the defendant's
mailing address and telephone/ fax number.
(f) The present strength of process serving agencies is
inadequate and should be appropriately increased and alternate methods of
service including courier service be used as ordinary mode of effecting
service.
(g) The courts should take strict action against parties or
witnesses who cause deliberate delay, through imposition of costs.
(h) Execution proceedings should be completed quickly for
satisfying the decree.
(i) The court should discourage frequent
interlocutory applications for concentration on disposal of cases as a whole.
19) To
check filing of false and frivolous cases the courts should impose compensatory
costs under section 35-A of the C.P.C. Similarly on the patron of High Court of
Sindh, the other High Courts may also amend the
relevant rules for incorporation of a provision to impose a cost upto rupees one lac for false,
frivolous and vexatious litigation.
20) Civil
and criminal functions of the court should be bifurcated so that the judicial
officers can try criminal and civil cases exclusively. For fuller comprehension
of civil/criminal law and experience, such judicial officers be
rotated annually.
LONG TERM MEASURES
1) The
judges of High Courts should carryout inspections of prisons periodically for
ensuring compliance of Prison Rules and giving on the spot remedy/relief to the
deserving prisoners in accordance with law.
2) The
High Courts should frame an equitable, consistent and coherent policy for
sending the Judges to the permanent and circuit benches so that every judge
gets equal opportunity to serve at the principal seat and benches. A Judge may
not be transferred just for hearing a particular case and thereafter
transferring him to other station, as this practice is against the principle of
independence of judiciary.
3. Necessary
funds be provided by Government for infrastructure support like construction of
courtrooms, amenities for lawyers/litigants parties. The strength of judicial
officers and administrative staff should be increased to cope with rising trend
of litigation in the country. Adequate staff, library facilities and accessory
equipment like computers should also be made available to courts.
The
Committee recommended the following:
(a) The vacant
posts in the subordinate courts should be immediately filled and funds for
creation of new additional posts of Civil Judges cum Judicial Magistrates may
be acquired from respective governments.
(b) Presently,
judicial officers are appointed through respective Provincial Public Service
Commissions which takes time. Keeping in view the emergent need of judges to
clear backlog, the High Courts should consider making appointments on adhoc basis.
(c) The High
Courts should utilize the Provincial Judicial Development Fund (PJDF) to make
available the essential paraphernalia such as provision of furniture, law
books, typewriters and creating an integrating computer network for access to information
and material and effective supervision/monitoring of the performance of the
subordinate courts.
(d) The High
Courts shall seek necessary funds from Provincial Governments for
infrastructure support like construction of courtrooms, amenities for lawyers/litigants
parties, residential accommodation of judicial officers/court staff and for
increasing the strength of judicial officers and administrative staff to cope
with the rising trend of litigation in country. Adequate staff, library
facilities and necessary equipment like computers should also be made available
to the Courts.
(e) Upgrading
and activation of judicial academies to arrange pre and in-service training of
the judicial officers and staff.
(f) Seminars
and workshop should be organized for judges to have regular interaction and
experience sharing with other judges at provincial and national level.
4) Scattered
courts are also one of the major causes of nonappearance of lawyers as it takes
hours to reach from one court to another. Therefore, in the cities court
complexes should be constructed to accommodate all courts in one premises.
5) Presently,
some judges of the High Courts are performing additional functions like
Chairman, Environmental Protection Tribunals, Labour
Appellate Tribunals etc which affects the working of the High Courts as a
whole, therefore, it is decided that the concerned Government may be asked to
appoint suitable persons against these positions instead of giving additional
charge to the High Court Judges.
6) The
Government of Sindh in exercise of powers conferred
under section 59 of the Prisons Act 1894 has brought an amendment in the
Prisons Rules where-under the condemned prisoners are not kept in death cells
till final decision on their appeals. Keeping in view the agonies of the
condemned prisoners detained in death cells, the Committee directed that the
Provincial Governments of
Balochistan and NWFP should consider making similar
arrangements for taking out the condemned prisoners from death cells and keeping
them in barracks with adequate security arrangements.
7) The
Provincial Governments should realize the difficulties of under resource and
over congested jails and establish new jails at district level or enhance the
capacity of existing jails by constructing new barracks duly equipped with
necessary amenities.
8) Non-production
of prisoners before the Courts for trial due to shortage of resources and
cramped judicial lockups is a major cause of delay in quick disposal of cases,
therefore, the Provincial Governments should equip the prison department with
necessary resources and increase the capacity of judicial lockups by
constructing additional rooms with necessary facilities and security so that
prisoners who are brought from other Districts should be kept there to face
their trial.
(i) The provincial governments should be
asked to construct jails at least at a district level and a sub-jail at tehsil level.
(ii) The Committee further resolved that specious judicial lockups
(Bhakhshi Khanas) with
necessary facilities should be constructed in the Court premises for under
trial prisoners rather than keeping them in prisons van in scorching
temperature. For the time being, in case of non availability of judicial
lockups the under trial prisoners may be kept in the lockups of police station
near the District Courts for their production during trial.
(iii) The jail authorities may adopt the system of double lock for
the children wards and the keys may be kept with two jail officials.
9) To
address the problem of medical facilities to the inmates of various jails, the
Committee recommended that the Chief Justices of the High Courts should hold
meetings with the Chief Secretaries and Finance/ Health Secretaries of the
provinces to chalk out policy for providing adequate medical treatment
facilities to the ailing prisoners.
10) The
capacity and functioning of process serving agencies be improved and for this
purpose, the provincial governments may be approached for funds.
The
service of summons through Internet, TCS, Telephones and any other efficient
method should be adopted by substituting the present outdated system of service
through bailiff / Peyada. The Registrars, of the
provincial High Courts with the approval of Chief Justices may settle subsidize
rates with the local courier service. Such courier agencies should furnish
reports to the concerned Courts regarding timely service of summons and in case
of non service without any cogent reasons the firm should be held responsible.
11) Computerization
and networking should be introduced at all levels of judicial hierarchy. By
introducing specifically designed software, the effectiveness of computers
could be enhanced to check and monitor the case flow and measuring the
qualitative and quantitative output of judicial officers. Therefore, all the
computers of a province should be connected through web based networking so
that data transferring to MIT branch, High Court becomes easy.
12) Installation
of Video Conferencing facility between the courts and jails will also help the
courts in early disposal of cases. Therefore, High Courts should take
initiatives for introducing modern techniques and automation in the courts.
13) In
the province of Punjab, the judicial officers of the subordinate Judiciary are
drawing additional judicial allowances equal to three times of their
salaries, therefore, it is desirable
that the judicial officers of all the provinces be treated alike and disparity
in their salaries and allowances be removed.
14) The salary/allowances of court staff should also be suitably
increased.
Annex
A
Institutions/Individuals
from whom input received for the compilation of
National Judicial Policy
1. Supreme
Court of
3.
4. High
Court of Sindh.
5.
6. High
Court of Balochistan.
7. All
District and Sessions Courts.
8. Mr.
Justice Mian Shakir-ullah-Jan,
Judge, Supreme Court of Pakistan.
9. Mr. Justice Ijaz ul Hassan, Judge, Supreme Court.
10. Mr. Justice M Qaim Jan Khan, Judge,
Supreme Court.
11. M
r. Justice Zia Perwaiz,
Judge, Supreme Court.
12. Mr.
Justice Ghulam Rabbani,
Judge, Supreme Court.
13. Mr.
Justice Rashid Ahmed Jhalandari, Judge, Supreme
Court.
14. Mr.
Justice (R) Rana Bhagwandas.
Member, LJCP.
15. Professor
Jawad S. Khawaja. Member, LJCP.
16. Ms.
Anis Haroon, Chairperson, National Commission on the
Status of Women/Member, LJCP.
17.
Attorney General for
18. Ministry
of Law & Justice, Govt. of
19. Law Department, Govt. of the
20. Law Department, Govt. of Sindh.
21. Law Department, Govt. of NWFP.
22. Law Department, Govt. of Balochistan.
23. Prosecutor
General,
24. Prosecutor
General, Sindh.
25. Prosecutor
General, N.W.F.P.
26. Advocate
General,
27. Advocate
General, Sindh.
28. Advocate
General, Balochistan.
29. Inspector
General of Police,
30. Inspector
General of Police, Sindh.
31. Inspector
General of Police, N.W.F.P.
32. Inspector
General of Police, Balochistan.
33. Inspector
General of Police,
34. Inspector
General of Prisons,
35. Inspector
General of Prisons, Sindh.
36. Inspector
General of Prisons, N.W.F.P.
37. Inspector
General of Prisons, Balochistan.
38. Director General, Federal Investigation Agency,
39. Mr.
Mahmood-ul-Hassan, Vice Chairman, Sindh
Bar Council,
40. Mr.
Naeem Perwaiz, Secretary,
NWFP Bar Council.
41. Mr.
Tahir Shabbir Ch, Advocate,
President, District Bar Association, Sahiwal.
42. Mr.
Niaz-ul-lah Khan Niazi,
Advocate, President, Islamabad Bar Association,
43. Mr.
Haroon Irshad Jannjua, President, District Bar Association, Chakwal.
44. Mr.
Hamid Khan, Advocate, Supreme Court.
45. Mr.
Ibad
46. Syed Zulfiqar Abbas
Naqvi, Advocate, Supreme Court,
47. Mr.
Mehmood Ahmed Ghani,
Advocate, Supreme Court,
48. Dr.
Tariq Hassan, Advocate,
Supreme Court,
49. Mr.
Rustam Khan Kundi, Advocate
High Court. Dera Ghazi Khan, NWFP.
50.
Syed M. Haroon Rashid,
Advocate, High Court,
51. Mr. Sabhagchand D. Matlani, Advocate. High Court, Dadu, Sindh.
52. Professor M.Wali khan,
Organizational Reform Expert, High Court of Sindh.
53. Syed Asghar
Ali Shah, ADSJ, NWFP.
54. Mian Fiyaz Rabbani,
SCJ, Mirwah, District Khairpur.
55. Rana Muhammad Nawaz
Khan, Civil Servant/Executive Officer,
56. Mr.
Javid Mian, District
Attorney,
57. Mr.
Abdul Ghani, (Citizen), Sagodha.
58. Mr.
M. Yaseen Malik, (Citizen),
District Gujarnawala.
59. Mr.
Khan Muhammad Khosa, Jampur.
60. Mrs.
Zarina Shamim, Widow of Ch.
Dil Muhammad Tarar,
Advocate Supreme Court,