P L D 1993 Lahore 819 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD YOUSAF and another ‑‑‑ Petitioners Versus THE STATE ‑‑‑ Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1993 Lahore 819 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Mian Ghulam Ahmad, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YOUSAF and another ‑‑‑ Petitioners Versus THE STATE ‑‑‑ Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1993 Lahore 819 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1993 Lahore 819 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Mian Ghulam Ahmad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1993 Lahore 819 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD YOUSAF and another ‑‑‑ Petitioners Versus THE STATE ‑‑‑ Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ ‑‑‑‑ S.526 ‑‑‑ Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307/34 ‑‑‑ Transfer of case ‑‑‑ Incident had occurred within the jurisdiction of police station "K" where the trial of the case was to take place in routine and very strong reasons should have existed warranting its trial elsewhere which the accused had not been able to invoke ‑‑ Accused might be living at "R" but they had allegedly involved themselves in an armed encounter with the complainant at a place in the area of police station "K" and they would have to face the trial there ‑‑‑ Transfer of the case from "K" to "R" was declined accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
A case under section 307/34, P.P.C. registered at P.S. Kotli Sattian, District Rawalpindi, is pending in a Criminal Court at Kotli Sattian and is sought to be transferred to a Court at Rawalpind4 the ground being that it would be inconvenient for the accused persons who are putting up at Rawalpindi to defend themselves in a Court situate at a far-off place (Kotli Sattian, which is sub-division of Rawalpindi District) especially as the complainant belongs to that place and has approach to the witnesses. It is urged that if the accused are forced to face trial at Kotli Sattian, they will be involved in the other cases at the behest of the other side. It is also submitted that the petitioners have. engaged a counsel from Rawalpindi, and he is not prepared to go to Kotli sattian and the accused cannot afford to engage another counsel.
2. The learned Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi had rejected the transfer application, vide order dated 20-7-1993, observing that the grounds invoked by the accused could not validly be availed of for transfer of the case which pertained to P.S. Kotli Sattian and normally was to be tried at that place. There the petitioners had pleaded poverty, besides atmosphere at Kotli Sattian being charged with animosity against them. The incident had occurred within the jurisdiction of P.S. Kotli Sattian and the trial of the case has to take place there in routine and very strong reasons should exist warranting the trial of the case elsewhere. I do not. think that the accused have been able to invoke such exceptional grounds. They may be living at Rawalpindi but they had allegedly involved themselves in an armed encounter with the complainant at a place the area of P.S. Kotli Sattian, and they will have to face the trial there. Again, the case is transferred to Rawalpindi, it will work increasing hardship to the complainant, who similarly may experience a hostile atmosphere at Rawalpindi, where he will have to engage another counsel. He may undergo comparatively more inconvenience, on being made to pursue his case in a Court at Rawalpindi.
3. There is thus available absolutely no good ground justifying transfer of the case from Kotli Sattian to Rawalpindi. Such prayer made by the accused 11 persons has therefore to be rejected. The petition stands dismissed accordingly. N.H.Q./M-1166/L PETITION DISMISSED