1996 P Cr (PLP)

BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH, J.

This is an appeal from an order passed by a learned Judge of the Shariat Court by which a transfer application was rejected. The appellant stood as surety in a murder case. Due to the absence of the accused the surety bond has been forfeited and the appellant is being proceeded against for recovery of the amount of surety bond by the District Criminal Court, Mirpur. In his application moved before the Shariat Court Ghulam Sarwar stated that he has strained relations with the learned Sessions Judge who is member of the District Criminal Court. He levelled the allegation that the learned Sessions Judge was taking personal interest in getting him arrested. It was alleged that the learned Sessions Judge provided a chance to the accused to abscond. These allegations have been rejected by the learned Judge of the Shariat Court. Raja Imdad Ali Khan, the learned counsel for the appellant, has reiterated the same allegations before us. We have gone through different orders passed by the District Criminal Court, to which the learned Sessions Judge was a party, and find that different orders passed from time to time are such which are normally passed in such cases. Therefore, there is nothing on the record tending to show that the learned Sessions Judge was not impartial in dealing with the case. However, Raja Imdad Ali Khan has drawn our attention that in his parawise comments submitted to the Shariat Court, the learned Sessions Judge stated that the appellant appeared to be fugitive from law and also that it was a profession of the appellant to stand surety for accused persons residing in Pakistan. It is submitted by the learned counsel that these observations are not only unfounded but also indicate lack of impartiality. In our view the learned Sessions Judge should have avoided to make observations referred to above. We have no reason to believe that the learned Sessions Judge would not act impartially in the case but the observations referred to above tend to show that the learned Sessions Judge felt offended due to moving of the, transfer application. Therefore, if he is allowed to decide the case it may not appear that justice has not been done although it may actually be done by him. Thus, the golden principle that justice should not only be done but should also appear to have been done may be violated. Therefore, we are of the view that the Shariat Court should have accepted the transfer application. Consequently we set aside the order of the Shariat Court and transfer v. Ghulam Sarwar" from the District Criminal Court, Mirpur to District Criminal Court, Bhimber for disposal in accordance with law. It is directed that the Court at Bhimber shall decide the matter on or before the 15th of April, 1996. Ghulam Sarwar is directed to appear before the District Criminal Court, Bhimber on 11th of March, 1996. N.H.Q./107/SC(AJ&K) Case transferred.