MLD 2020

2020 PLP 1071 (MLD)

NOOR MUHAMMAD — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Balochistan
Decided Date
2019-August-16
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2020 PLP 1071 (MLD)
Forum / Court Balochistan
Bench Members N/A
Parties NOOR MUHAMMAD — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent
Primary Law (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 PLP 1071 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 PLP 1071 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Balochistan bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP 1071 (MLD) (NOOR MUHAMMAD — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Headnotes / Summary

S. 526

Transfer of case

Allegation of sending threatening messages

Scope

Applicant sought transfer of his case from one district to another on the grounds that he was Minister of the Province and that serious threats of dire consequences had been extended to him by the complainant

Applicant had alleged the threatening messages from the complainant but he had not produced copies of the messages or report from the concerned quarter

Mere mentioning in the application that threatening messages were delivered, without cogent reasons, could not be considered

Applicant had not produced any convincing material nor mentioned such authority to which he approached to lodge the complaint

Simply on apprehension of the applicant for danger to his life a murder case could not be transferred

Reason given by the applicant for his security had no sanctity

Application, being devoid of merits, was dismissed.

S. 526

Transfer of case

Scope

Transfer of case cannot be claimed as a matter of routine or at the wish of the parties unless it is apparent on the face of record that parties seeking the transfer cannot get fair and just treatment or trial.

S. 526

Transfer of case

Scope

Case not to be transferred from the court of competent jurisdiction unless the allegations/grounds seeking transfer of the case are supported by strong cogent reasons or convincing evidence.

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, J.

This Criminal Transfer Application has been preferred by the applicant/accused Noor Muhammad, seeking transfer of the case FIR No.27/2011, registered with Police Station Sinjavi from the file of learned Sessions Judge, Loralai to any other court of competent jurisdiction in Quetta.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 04.11.2011 complainant Haji Abdul Hameed lodged an FIR No. 27/2011 with Police Station Sinjavi, alleging therein that on the stated date on receipt of information that his son Abdul Qayum was beaten and taken to hospital, he rushed to the hospital and found his son lying dead in the pool of blood. Tariq son of Abdul Shakoor told him that after offering the prayer of Jumma he and Abdul Qayum after taking tea were going to home on motorcycle, when they reached near Haji Peer Muhammad shop, where they found accused persons namely Baz Muhammad, Raz Muhammad and Haji Noor Muhammad. Accused Raz Muhammad started firing upon them whereas Haji Noor Muhammad attacked upon Abdul Qayum on his head by means of Churri and accused Baz Muhammad on his chest by means of Churri, due to which Abdul Qayum sustained serious injuries and fell down on earth, whilst the accused person boarded in black surf vehicle and a white 2-D Car and made their escape good from the scene, while Abdul Qayyum succumbed to injuries in the way to hospital.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant being law abiding citizen has surrendered himself before the trial court, wherefrom he has been admitted to pre-arrest bail which was later on confirmed; that being a political entity and a sitting minister of Balochistan Provincial Assembly, serious threats for dire consequences have been extended to the applicant from complainant, on the basis whereof the instant case may kindly be transferred from Sessions Judge Loralai to any other Court at Quetta.

4. Learned APG also opposed the transfer application and urged for dismissal of the application.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case. The perusal of record reveals that the applicant is sitting minister of Government of Balochistan. Admittedly the complainant is not holding any such position. The security and liberty of the citizen is sole responsibility of the Government The government is responsible for the security of his minister. It is astonishing when the government cannot provide security to the minister then how will he fulfill his responsibility in respect of general public. It is admitted fact that the transfer of case cannot be claimed as a matter of routine or at the wish of the parties unless it is apparent at the face of record that parties seeking the transfer cannot get fair and just treatment or trial. The applicant has alleged the threatening messages from the complainant side but has not produced copies of the messages or report from the concerned quarter, mere mentioning the threatening messages in the memo of appeal without cogent reasons cannot be considered. The applicant has not produced any convincing material nor mentioned such authority to which he approached to lodge the complaint. Simply on apprehension of the applicant for danger to his life a murder case cannot be transferred. Thus, the reason given by the applicant for his security has no sanctity. It is by now well settled law that a case should not be transferred from the court of competent jurisdiction unless the allegations/ground seeking transfer of the case are supported by strong cogent reasons or convincing evidence. Reliance is placed on the case of Altaf Hussain v. State PLD 2014 Sindh

287. In view of above, the learned counsel for the applicant has failed to point out any cogent reason or convincing evidence, as such the application being devoid of merits is dismissed accordingly. SA/111/Bal. Application dismissed.