Mushtaq Hussain Khan Versus Mir Khan Khetran
The applicant sought the transfer of a criminal trial (FIR No. 29/2024, Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860) from the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Rakhni, District Barkhan, to Quetta. The applicant, a resident of Punjab, alleged that he faced imminent threats to his life in Barkhan and that the complainant, despite residing in Islamabad, had chosen to lodge the FIR in his home district of Barkhan for ulterior motives. The respondent and the State opposed the transfer, arguing the threats were speculative. The High Court observed that the complainant had indeed lodged other FIRs in Islamabad, raising questions about the choice of venue. Emphasizing Article 10-A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, which guarantees the right to a fair trial and due process, the Court held that genuine apprehensions regarding safety and the ability to attend proceedings must be considered. Consequently, the Court ordered the transfer of the trial to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate-I, Quetta, to ensure a fair trial and due process.
- Does the right to a fair trial under Article 10-A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 require the consideration of a party's genuine safety apprehensions when deciding on a transfer of trial application?
- Can a criminal trial be transferred from one district to another based on the applicant's inability to safely attend proceedings in the original jurisdiction?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Article 10-A, Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Section 512, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Order
Muhammad Aamir Nawaz Rana, J .--- Through this application, the applicant seeks transfer of trial of a criminal case titled The State v. Mushtaq Ahmed, in FIR No.29/2024, dated 27.07.2024, registered under section 489-F P.P.C at Police Station Rakhni, District Barkhan, from the Court of Judicial Magistrate Rakhni at Barkhan to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Quetta on the ground of imminent danger to his life in case he proceeds to District Barkhan (Balochistan) to appear before the competent Court of law to defend his case.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case with mala fide intention. According to learned counsel, the applicant faces serious threats to his life from the complainant. Learned counsel further contended that the complainant is a resident of Islamabad, and has lodged three other FIRs in Islamabad, however, the present FIR was intentionally lodged by him in his home district to serve ulterior motives. Learned counsel further argued that the applicant hails from Punjab, and given the current law and order situation in Barkhan, it would be life-threatening for the applicant to pursue his case in Barkhan. Per learned counsel, in such circumstances, the applicant has also filed Criminal Pre- Arrest Bail Application No. 279/2025 before this Court.
3. Conversely, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 (complainant) strongly refuted the contentions of learned counsel for the applicant and argued that the allegation made by the applicant that the complainant lodged the FIR in his home district to serve ulterior motives lacks any factual basis and is merely an attempt to divert attention from the merits of the case. Learned counsel further contended that the applicant's claim of life threats is speculative and unsupported by any concrete evidence. Lastly, learned counsel contended that the application for the transfer of the case be dismissed, as there is no justifiable reason to transfer the case to another jurisdiction.
4. Learned State counsel also opposed the transfer application and requested for its dismissal.
Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. The admitted feature of the case is that the applicant is a resident of Bhakkar (Province of Panjab) and has expressed his apprehension that there is a serious threat to his life if he pursues the matter before the Judicial Magistrate, Rakhni, at Barkhan. Learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant has admitted that three other FIRs were also lodged by respondent No.1/complainant in Islamabad. In such view of the matter, why this FIR was lodged by respondent No.1/complainant at Rakhni is a matter that requires consideration by the trial Court, as it is apparent that, although respondent No.1/complainant belongs to Rakhni, but he is currently residing in Islamabad.
6. While deciding applications for the transfer of cases, the genuine reservations of the parties must be considered. Article 10- A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (the 'Constitution') guarantees the right to a fair trial and due process of law. If any party, due to unavoidable circumstances, is unable to attend legal proceedings in a particular area and expresses his/her reservations, then such apprehensions should not be brushed aside or ignored; rather the attending peculiar circumstances of each case have to be considered while deciding matters regarding transfer of cases from one place to another.
7. It has been informed by learned counsel for the applicant that report under section 512 Cr.P.C. has been submitted to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Rakhni at Barkhan by the Investigation Officer.
In the attending circumstances of the case and in order to ensure fair trial and due process of law, as envisaged under Article 10-A of the Constitution, the trial of the case titled The State v. Mushtaq Ahmed, in FIR No. 29/2024, dated 27.07.2024, registered under section 489-F P.P.C at Police Station Rakhni, District Barkhan, is hereby transferred from the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Rakhni at Barkhan to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate-I, Quetta.
Copy of this order be sent to both the Courts for information and compliance.
JK/103/Bal. Application allowed.