2012-14 PLP 59 (GBLR)
HAYAT KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2012-14 PLP 59 (GBLR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Appellate Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | HAYAT KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012-14 PLP 59 (GBLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012-14 PLP 59 (GBLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Appellate Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012-14 PLP 59 (GBLR) (HAYAT KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 526
Main ground for transfer of case, was that due to friendly terms of relative of accused with the Sessions Judge concerned, there was a reasonable apprehension that Trial Court would not act fairly and impartially
Said ground for transfer of case was not sufficient
Transfer of case could not be claimed as a matter of routine, and at the wishes of any litigant, unless it was apparent on the face of record that party seeking transfer of the case, could not get fair and just treatment at the hands of Judge from whose court the transfer of the case was sought
Applicant seeking transfer of case, should seek transfer of case with cogent and plausible reasons
Self-procured mistrust and expression of having no trust, or losing confidence in the court, merely based on general and vague allegations, was hardly sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the court under S.526, Cr.P.C.
Petitioner having not been able to point out any justification for interference of Supreme Appellate Court in the impugned order passed by Chief Court, whereby application for transfer of case was dismissed.