ASIF IMTIAZ vs THE STATE and 4 others
This criminal transfer petition was filed under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, seeking the transfer of a murder trial, specifically the case titled 'State v. Khuda Baldish' pending before an Additional Sessions Judge in Ahmad Pur East. The petitioner alleged that the presiding officer was biased, claiming that the respondents had secured an assurance of acquittal through the intervention of a local Member of National Assembly (MNA) who allegedly visited the judge's chambers. Additionally, the petitioner argued that the expeditious processing of a bail application during the trial indicated mala fide intent. The Lahore High Court examined whether these allegations provided sufficient grounds for transferring the case. The Court held that while concrete evidence is not strictly required to prove apprehension of an unfair trial, there must be some material to substantiate such concerns. Finding the allegations regarding the MNA's visits implausible and unsupported by affidavit evidence, and noting that the bail proceedings showed no procedural impropriety, the Court dismissed the petition, ruling that mere unsubstantiated apprehension does not justify the transfer of a criminal case.
- Is concrete evidence required to substantiate an apprehension of an unfair trial for the purpose of transferring a case?
- Does the expeditious processing of a bail application during a trial constitute sufficient grounds for alleging judicial bias?
- Can a case be transferred based solely on unsubstantiated allegations of interference by political figures in judicial proceedings?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD KHALID ALVI, J.---Through this application petitioner seeks transfer of case titled as "State v. Khuda Baldish" pending in the Court of Mr. Muzaffar All Khan, Additional Session Judge, Ahmad Per East in case F.I.R. No,25 of 2006 under sections 302 and 34 P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Channi Ghot Tehsil Ahmad Pur East District Bahawalpur.
2. Allegations levelled in this application are that respondents-accused persons have settled something with the learned Presiding Officer with the help of local MNA namely Ali Hussan Gillani, who visited the Court of said officer on 7-6-2006 and 16-6-2006, whereafter, the respondents- accused persons have claimed that they have managed their acquittal. It is also submitted that a bail application of the accused persons at the stage when trial has already commenced is being processed expeditiously, also casts serious doubt about the integrity of the learned Presiding Officer.
3. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. No doubt, for the purposes of transfer of a case material in the shape of evidence is not required to be produced by a party apprehending unfair trial but, of course, there must be some material in order to substantiate the apprehensions entertained by a party. Order sheet of the bail application indicates no haste or hurry on the part of the learned trial Court indicating an mala fide attributable to him.
5. The visits of MNA on 7-6-2006 and 16-6-2006 are otherwise unnatural. It an MNA wants to interfere in the trial of a murder case, he would not, in the ordinary course visit a Presiding Officer in the court premises and that too in his chamber in view of public at large. Even if, this allegation be true, the petitioner was having many persons who could testify the same through their affidavits but nothing has been placed on recorded in this context.
6. For what has been stated above, find no merit in this petition, the same accordingly dismissed.