2025 P Cr (PLP)

Rozi Khan Barrech, J.

Through the instant transfer application, the applicants seek transfer of case FIR No. 01 of 2023 registered with Levies Station Mangochar from the court of learned Sessions Judge Kalat ("trial court") to any other competent court of law having jurisdiction largely on the ground of biasness of the learned presiding officer, seized with the trial of the subject case.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the complainant Meer Muhammad, son of Khan Muhammad, lodged the aforesaid FIR with Levies Station Mangocher under section 302 P.P.C.. After completion of the usual investigation, the challan was submitted before the trial court.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the available record with his able assistance.

4. The transfer of the case being sought mainly on the ground of biasness of the learned Presiding Officer, seized with the trial of the subject case. The Honorable Apex court, in the case of Pakistan Newspaper Society and others v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2012 SC 1) has graciously laid down that; ""bias is said to be of three different kinds:-- (a) A Judge may have a bias in the subject matter which means that he is himself a party or has direct connection with the litigation, so as to constitute a legal interest. A 'legal interest' means that the Judge is 'in such a position that a bias must be assumed' . (b) Pecuniary interest in the cause, however, slight, 'will disqualify the Judge, even though it is not proved that the decision has in fact been affected by reason of such interest. For this reason, where a person having such interest sits as one of the Judges the decision is vitiated. (c) A Judge may have a personal bias towards a party owing to relationship and the like or he may be personally hostile to a party as a result of events happening either before or during the trial. Whenever there is any allegation of personal bias, the question which should be satisfied is - "Is there in the mind of the litigant a reasonable apprehension that he would not get a fair trial?" The test is whether there is a 'real likelihood of prejudice', but it does not require certainty." 'Real likelihood' is the apprehension of a reasonable man apprised of the facts and not the suspicion of fools or 'capricious persons'."

5. Keeping in view the aforementioned dictums laid down by the apex court, it can be safely observed that the applicant has failed to establish the bias in Judge because utterances of the other side that he will get favour from the court does not constitute sufficient ground for transfer of the case from one court to another. The contention of the applicant that the trial court is biased against him is not supported by any sort of evidence. In order to demonstrate bias against Judge, it must be established that some act or expression of a judge visible on the ground will adversely affect the case. Mere assumption and apprehension cannot be entertained as tangible evidence; therefore, the bald statement cannot be made the basis for the transfer of case, and the case would not be transferred as a matter of routine or at the whims of the parties. The administration of justice requires that litigants should have confidence in the judicial system. Although the application could be filed for transfer of a case when a party has sufficient reasons, grounds, and evidence in his/her possession regarding pecuniary interest, and bias of judicial officer. Certainly, these elements are not available in the case in hand.

6. The allegation levelled in the application, when examined, reveals that no substantial evidence has been attached/annexed along with the application for transfer of the case. Most of the allegations are of vague and evasive nature, having no substance. Whether merely an apprehension of not getting justice from the hands of the court could be ground for the transfer of the case, surely this is not the position of law on the subject. For one to prove bias of a judge has to prove through trustworthy evidence. For the above-stated reasons, the application is dismissed in limine. JK/25/Bal. Application dismissed.