' Record has been received.
2. Respondent No,2 remained unserved. According to the A.S.I. He was not available.
3. Learned A.A.-G. Very frankly submitted that it is very difficult to defend this order. In this view of the matter the impugned order is suspended. The result is that the order holds the field. The revision to come up, for arguments on 22nd of April, 1996.
4. The perusal of the record shows that the application for cancellation on the bail was filed on 8th of February, 1996, notice was issued and record w requisitioned for 28th of February, 1996. The petitioners appeared but the record had not been received, therefore, the matter was adjourned to 19th o March, 1996. It was on this date that the learned Sessions Judge after referring to the injuries proceeded to observe that the order deserves serious arguments and adjourned the application to 14th of May, 1996, and in the meanwhile directed the petitioners to be taken into custody to face the trial of this application. It is clear from the file that the learned Sessions Judge did not exercise his jurisdiction in accordance with law and the missioners now genuinely apprehended that they would not get justice from the said Court. In this view of the matter, in exercise of suo motu powers, the application for cancellation of bail titled Liaquat Ali v. Muhammad Sharif etc. Is withdrawn from the Court of Sessions Judge, Khanewal and is made over to Malik Azharul Haq, Additional Sessions Judge, Khanewal, who is directed to decide the application expeditiously in any case within 15 days.
The petitioners shall appear before the transferee Court on 4-4-1996 while Saleem Ahmad, A.S.I. Is directed to ensure that the complainant is served for 4-4-1996 for his appearance before the transferee Court. The record to be transmitted today.
Case transferred.