YLR 2007

2007 PLP 1404 (YLR)

ASIF IMTIAZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 4 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.25-T/BWP of 2006, decided on 20th June, 2006.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Khalid Alvi, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2007 PLP 1404 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Muhammad Khalid Alvi, J
Parties ASIF IMTIAZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 4 others — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1404 (YLR)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1404 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Khalid Alvi, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1404 (YLR) (ASIF IMTIAZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 4 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Abdul Rasheed Rashid for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 526

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302

Transfer of case

Applicant had alleged that respondents/accused had settled something with the Presiding Officer of the Court with the help of local M.N.A. who visited court of the Presiding Officer

Validity

No doubt, for the purposes of transfer of a case matter in the shape of evidence was not required to be produced by the party apprehending unfair trial, but, there must be some material in order to substantiate the apprehensions entertained by a party

If M.N.A. wanted to interfere in the trial of a murder case, he would not, in the ordinary course, visit the Presiding Officer in the court premises and that too in his Chambers in the view of public at large

Even if that allegation was true, petitioner was having many persons who could testify the same through their affidavits, but nothing had been placed on record in that context

Application for transfer of case having no merit, was dismissed.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD KHALID ALVI, J.

Through this application petitioner seeks transfer of case titled as "State v. Khuda Bakhsh" pending in the Court of Mr. Muzaffar Ali Khan, Additional Session Judge, Ahmad Pur East in case F.I.R. No.25 of 2006 under sections 302 and 34 P.P.C. registered at Police Station Channi Ghot Tehsil Ahmad Pur East District Bahawalpur.

2. Allegations levelled in this application are that respondents-accused persons have settled something with the learned Presiding Officer with the help of local MNA namely Ali Hussan Gillani, who visited the Court of said officer on 7-6-2006 and 16-6-2006, whereafter, the respondents-accused persons have claimed that they have managed their acquittal. It is also submitted that a bail application of the accused persons at the stage when trial has already commenced is being processed expeditiously, also casts serious doubt about the integrity of the learned Presiding Officer.

3. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. No doubt, for the purposes of transfer of a case material in the shape of evidence is not required to be produced by a party apprehending unfair trial but, of course, there must be some material in order to substantiate the apprehensions entertained by a party. Order sheet of the bail application indicates no haste or hurry on the part of the learned trial Court indicating an mala fide attributable to him.

5. The visits of MNA on 7-6-2006 and 16-6-2006 are otherwise unnatural. If, an MNA wants to interfere in the trial of a murder case, he would not, in the ordinary course visit a Presiding Officer in the court premises and that too in his chamber in view of public at large. Even if, this allegation be true, the petitioner was having many persons who could testify the same through their affidavits but nothing has been placed on recorded in this context.

6. For what has been stated above, I find no merit in this petition, the same is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./A-18/L Application dismissed.