2015 PLP 2292 (YLR)

SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, J.

The applicants/accused seek transfer of Special Case/Crime No.74 of 2010 of Police Station, Agra (Re-St. v. Aslam and others) for offences punishable under sections 365-A, P.P.C. and 7-Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, from Anti-terrorism court to any other court.

2. The relevant facts of the case are that the applicants/accused, were booked in Crime No.74 of 2010, registered at Police Station, Agra for offences punishable under section 365-A, P.P.C. and 7-Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. It is alleged that the applicants along with other co-accused persons, armed with deadly weapons, way-laid the complainant and his witnesses and abducted Gada Hussain son of Muhammad Bachal Siyal; thereafter demanded Rs.22,00000-00 (22 Lacs) as ransom, hence complainant lodged the FIR. After usual investigation the accused persons were sent-up for their trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants/ accused inter alia contended that the attitude of the learned Presiding Officer of the Anti-Terrorism Court Khairpur Mir's against applicants/accused is very harsh and hostile; whereas the attitude with the complainant party is proper and fair, thus they have apprehension that they will not get justice by the said Court/Presiding Officer. 5.(sic) It is further revealed that the learned trial Judge, in pursuance of order of this Court, filed comments, wherein, denied all the allegations levelled against him; however conceded for transfer of the case.

4. Learned A.P.G vehemently opposed the transfer of this case and argued that allegations leveled are not supported by any proof, therefore, instant application is not maintainable under the Law.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants/accused and on meticulous examination of available record, it is pertinent to say that transfer of case cannot be left at the whims and wishes of the parties; and one who seeks transfer of case has to justify such transfer with cogent reasons. It will be conducive to reproduce the relevant portion of the comments of the trial Judge:-- "It is submitted that in the said application dated 11-12-2013 the accused / appellants namely Muhammad Aslam, Amin, Liaquat and Shoukat have shown their no confidence upon this court, but conversely their counsel namely Mr.Aftab Ahmed Shar, learned Advocate for accused Shoukat and Mr.Abdul Kareem Janwari, learned Advocate for accused Muhammad Aslam with the permission of their clients/appellants in open court have shown their confidence upon this court and they have completed their cross-examination to the last witness PC Roshan Ali on the same date i.e. 11-12-2012. However two accused/appellants namely Liaquat and Amin stated in open court that the present application dated 11-12-2012, written by Mr. Muzafar Ali Shaikh, Advocate in his own hand writing in the jail premises and who obtained their LRTIs and also taken signature/LTI from other co-accused person and asked the accused persons to put up/place the same application before the undersigned on my arrival inside the jail premises. Thereafter Mr. Muzafar Ali Shaikh went away from the jail premises" From bare perusal of comments and consideration of grounds, it is suffice to say that the learned counsel for the applicants/accused has failed to substantiate the aforesaid allegations by cogent evidence, and mere allegations are not sufficient to transfer a case from the court, having jurisdiction; because transfer of a case from a competent court of law on mere apprehension is not within spirit of law, more particularly, when such apprehension, otherwise, appears to have come to an end as within presence of the applicants/ accused their counsel, in trial court, conducted the trial and even have shown faith in trial court. Accordingly, in such like situation the application merits no consideration which was dismissed by short order dated 21-2-2013. MWA/A-30/Sindh Application dismissed.