SHAFI MUHAMMAD and others vs MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and another
This matter concerns a petition challenging an order that transferred a criminal trial from one District to another without providing the accused (petitioners) an opportunity to be heard. The core legal question was whether a trial transfer order passed without notice to or the participation of the accused is legally sustainable. The Supreme Court held that the impugned order was procedurally flawed because the petitioners were neither made parties to the proceedings nor issued notice, and the transfer was granted solely based on the consent of a Law Officer. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order, converting the petition into an appeal and allowing it. The Court directed that the transfer application be treated as pending, requiring the petitioners to be joined as parties and the application to be decided afresh on its merits after providing both sides a full opportunity of hearing. The judgment reinforces the fundamental principle of natural justice, specifically the right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem) in judicial proceedings affecting a party's rights.
- Can a criminal trial be transferred from one District to another without providing the accused an opportunity to be heard?
- Is a transfer order valid if the accused were not made parties to the proceedings and received no notice?
- Does the consent of a Law Officer alone justify the transfer of a criminal trial without judicial consideration of the accused's position?
ORDER
1. ' The trial, which is being faced by the petitioners, has been transferred from one District to another through the impugned order without granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioners/accused. So much so, they were not even made party to the proceedings and no notice was issued to them and apparently the impugned order has been passed because the Law Officer gave consent for the transfer of the trial to Sessions Judge, Malir, Karachi.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel representing respondent No, 1/complainant. Since the petitioners were not granted any hearing at the time of passing of the impugned order, the learned counsel for the parties are in agreement to the remand of the case in the following manner:-- ' The impugned order/judgment shall stand set aside and the respondent No, l's application for transfer of the case/trial shall be deemed pending in which the petitioners shall be joined as party and the transfer application shall be decided afresh on merits after granting hearing to both the parties.
3. ' This petition is accordingly converted into appeal and allowed in the above terms. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.