Mst. BASHIRAN BIBI vs BASHIR AHMAD and 3 others
This petition was filed under the inherent powers of the High Court seeking the transfer of a criminal trial, 'The State v. Bashir Ahmad', from the court of an Additional Sessions Judge in Mailsi to another jurisdiction. The petitioner alleged a loss of confidence in the trial court, claiming that the presiding judge had confirmed the respondent's pre-arrest bail through the influence of a police tout. The core legal question was whether a trial should be transferred based on mere apprehension of bias without substantiated proof of misconduct. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner failed to provide any evidence to support the allegation of bias or to identify the alleged tout. Furthermore, the Court noted that the bail confirmation order itself appeared justified based on the facts. The Court emphasized that judicial officers are presumed to perform their duties with honesty and dedication. It laid down the principle that transfer of a trial cannot be granted on bald, unsubstantiated allegations, as doing so would undermine the independence and security of judicial officers and encourage parties to make motivated, false accusations for personal gain.
- Can a criminal trial be transferred to another court based solely on a party's bald allegation of bias without supporting evidence?
- Does the confirmation of a bail order by a trial court, without more, constitute sufficient grounds to establish a reasonable apprehension of bias?
- What is the standard for transferring a trial when a party alleges that a judicial officer has been influenced by external factors?
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN, J.---This petition has been filed to seek transfer of trial of case "The State v. Bashir Ahmad" FIR No,550/201I dated 21-11-2011 police station Mitru, Vehari, from the court of Syed Naveed Raza Bukhari, Additional Sessions Judge, Mailsi, to any other court. The sole ground urged before the court is that petitioner has lost confidence on the trial court, as pre-arrest bail of the respondent/accused was confirmed by the said court, through a police tout.
2. Heard.
3. I have gone through the entire file including the bail confirmation order but could not find out anything in the said order which in any way could give rise to some suspicion, as the same order is otherwise, fully justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. Furthermore, the petitioner/complainant did not assail the said bail confirmation order before any court, nor even the name of the tout who purportedly ensured confirmation of bail to the respondent/accused, has been disclosed in this petition. With such a simple and bald allegation, just on account of apprehension or fear that petitioner/complainant would not get justice from the trial court, without there being any proof in this regard, the petition in hand cannot be allowed. At the same time it may be observed here that the Judicial Officers are expected and presumed to be performing their duties with all honesty and dedication, by knowing that the have been bestowed with a sacred obligation to deliver justice beyond any worldly temptation. Interference by this Court in the working of the trial courts, on fallacious grounds would give rise to a sense of insecurity amongst the Judicial Officers and in such eventuality the Judicial Officers may not be able to work with required vigor. For this reason also motivated attempts of the parties for their personal gains, leveling false allegations against the Judicial Officer, have to be curbed at this level. This petition, therefore, is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- Abdul Razzaq vs The State and 2 others 2022 PCRLJ 741