Kamran Afridi vs State
This criminal appeal challenged an order passed by the Special Court (CNS), Islamabad, which dismissed the appellant's application seeking the transfer of his narcotics case. The appellant, facing charges under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997, alleged that his tribal opponents had a nexus with the presiding judge, thereby creating an apprehension of bias and an unfair trial. The core legal question was whether the appellant established sufficient grounds to warrant the transfer of his case from the Special Court to another jurisdiction. The High Court dismissed the appeal in limine, holding that the appellant's allegations were unsubstantiated, frivolous, and lacked any evidentiary basis. The Court emphasized that judicial officers must be protected from baseless allegations intended to exert pressure or frustrate the performance of their duties. Furthermore, the Court noted that the case involved a prosecution by the Anti-Narcotics Force, rather than a private dispute, and that transfer requests cannot be granted based on the mere whims or subjective apprehensions of an accused, especially when no material demonstrates actual bias.
- Can a criminal case be transferred from a Special Court based solely on the accused's unsubstantiated apprehension of bias?
- Does the High Court have the authority to transfer a case from a Special Court under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Is an accused entitled to the transfer of a trial on the basis of alleged links between the presiding judge and the accused's tribal opponents without supporting evidence?
- Section 9-C, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 49, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 265-C, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Mohsin Akhtar Kayani J.--Through the instant appeal, the appellant has assailed the order dated 24.11.2020, passed by learned Judge Special Court (CNS), Islamabad, whereby application filed by the appellant for transfer of the case F.I.R No. 185/19, dated 09.09.2019, under Section 9-C CNSA, 1997, P.S ANF, Rawalpindi has been turned down.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant inter-alia contends that appellant is accused in the above mentioned criminal case and is facing trial, despite his arrest w.e.f. 09.09.2019, the Trial Court has not framed the charge and even he has tiled application for transfer of case that appellant belongs to Afridi Tribes, and their opponents are openly . claiming that they have some nexus with the learned Judicial Officer of the trial Court and they have managed to get the appellant convicted, lie further contends that his application has not been considered by the Trial Court in its true perspective and even impugned order is silent to that effect. He further contends that he has lost his interest upon learned Trial Court and his case be transferred to any other Court in terms of Section 49 of CNSA, 1997.
3. Arguments heard and record perused.
4. Perusal of record reveals that appellant is facing trial with Special Court (CNS), Islamabad in case F.I.R No. 185/19, dated 09.09.2019, under Section 9-C CINSA, 1997, P.S ANF, Rawalpi ndi, whereby challan has been submitted in the Court and case is now fixed for provision of copies in terms of Section 265-C Cr.P.C. The appellant has filed application for transfer of case from Special Court (CNS) to another Court with the particular allegation that opponent of the appellant's tribe in the same area are claiming that: {{URDU TEXT}}
5. Whale considering the above conten tion of the appellant, it appears that appellant is overstretching hits apprehensions, which are not justified from any record, even though the appellant's counsel has been Confronted to place any material to prima facie demonstrate any relationship of the learned Presiding Officer of the Court from any particular tribe with reference to this case, whereby no such material has been appended with this appeal nor placed on record. The entire record further reflects that it is not a case of private parties, who are dragger drawn against each other , rather appellant Kamran Afridi, who has been arrested on 08.09.2019 by the ANF Authorities in BMW Car, Registration No. ANT/525 being its Driver , who are working in coordination with other co-accused and separately transporting the narcotics in other vehicle and total got recovered 16.800 K.G Charas, 36 K.G Charas, 36 JK.G Opium, 39.600 K.G Opium respectively .
6. We have also gone through the provisi on of Section 49 of the CNSA, 1997, whereby the High Court is equipped with, the powers to transfer the case from Special Court to another Court established within the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court, however , in Islamabad Capital Territory only one Special Court (CNS) has been notified by the Federal Government, even otherwise, the allegation referred by the appellant has not been demonstrated in any manner , rather this Court considers it as an effort to frustrate the learned Presiding Officer from performance of his lawful duties.
7. It has also been noticed by this Court that in number of cases, accused have usually leveled false and frivolous allegations against the Presiding Officer of the Court in order to exert pressure for their favourable decisions or sometime assuming on the basis 'of their apprehension, which has nothing to do with the ground realities.
8. It has now been settled that when there is no substance in the allegation, the cases could not be transferred on mere whims and choice of the accused persons. We are mindful of the fact that accused is entitled for free and fair trial under the law; but on the other hand, the High Court while' exercising the supervisory jurisdiction has to protect the Judicial Officers from such kind of frivolous allegations, which have no basis. Even otherwise it is not a private dispute among the parties, whereby one of the parties is related to the Presiding Officer, rather instant case has been lodged on the complaint of Anti Narcotics Force, which is an independent authority dealing with the illegal transportation of drugs and psychotropic substances etc.
9. In view of above, we are not inclined to accept the transfer application as there is no substance in this appeal, therefore, same is hereby dismissed in limine.