IJAZ AHMED vs THE STATE and 2 others
The petitioner, who is the complainant in a criminal case registered under sections 302, 34, 109, and 404 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, filed a petition seeking the transfer of the case from the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhalwal, to another court of competent jurisdiction. The petitioner's apprehension was based on the fact that the presiding judge had previously acquitted four co-accused in the same case, leading the petitioner to fear that the remaining accused would also be acquitted. The Court held that the mere acquittal of co-accused does not constitute valid grounds for the transfer of a case. It emphasized that the case of each accused must be decided on its own merits, particularly noting that the acquitted co-accused were charged with abetment, whereas the remaining respondents were alleged to have actively participated in the occurrence. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, expressing confidence that the trial court would proceed strictly according to the law and merits of the case.
- Does the acquittal of co-accused in a criminal case provide sufficient grounds for the transfer of the case to another court?
- Is a trial court required to decide the case of each accused on its own merits regardless of the outcome for co-accused?
- Can a complainant seek the transfer of a case based solely on the apprehension that the trial judge might acquit the remaining accused?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 404, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J.--- Petitioner is complainant of case F.I.R. No,71 of 2006 dated 8-3-2006 for the offence under sections 302/34/109/404, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Midh Ranjha, Tehsil Bhalwal pending in the Court of Mr: Qaiser Nazir Butt, Additional Sessions Judge, Bhalwal District Sargodha and through this petition prayer has been made for transfer of the same to some other Court of competent jurisdiction, on the ground that the said judicial officer has already acquitted four of the co-accused and petitioner apprehends that remaining accused who have been put to trial would also be acquitted.
2. I am afraid the contention raised by learned counsel has no force because case of each accused is to be decided on merits and admittedly the role attributed to the acquitted co-accused was that of abetment whereas the role attributed to respondents Nos.3 and 4 is of actively participating in the occurrence, I am sanguine that the trial Court will decide the case strictly on merits after complying with all the legal formalities. This petition having no merits stand dismissed.