I have looked at the proceedings of 22.11.2024 as well as those of 27.11.2024 and noted the age of the file in court. the court has equally recorded that on the 27.11.2024, the prosecutor failed to attend court on appointed time in the afternoon thus leaving the court with little but to draw the inference that it was hellbent on delaying the matter and not being courteous to the court.
The court further notes and appreciates that the prosecution had so far called a total of 13 witnesses and that only the investigation office remains to testify and that on the last date it told the court that the witness reported not having been aware of the date.
Offence the accused faces is serious and deserves that every material fact be allowed to go into the record to facilitate a just and fair decision by the court.
Only on account of the ground covered so far, am i persuaded to overlook the conduct of the prosecution on the 27.11.2024.
The orders of 27.11.2024, are revised in that the closed case for the prosecution is opened on condition that the date set for mention, the 19.12.2024, shall be the date to take the evidence of the remaining witness on which date if the witness will not have attended court, the orders of 27.11.2024 will stand reinstated.