Transfer of Criminal Case

2026 PLD 160 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 528Transfer of criminal caseGroundsPersistent suggestion of Judicial Officer to settle/compromise not a ground for transfer of case

Accused/petitioner moved an application for the transfer of criminal case from the Trial Court, which was allowed and case was transferred to other Court

Validity

In the transfer application, it was mentioned that the complainant lodged false FIR against accused/petitioner in which accused was continuously facing the trial, however the Presiding Officer continuously was forcing the applicant/accused to compromise with the complainant and the complainant party also loudly spoke in the area that they would get the decision in their favour, as the complainant party had visiting and dining terms with the Presiding Officer, therefore, the applicant/accused had lost his faith and trust upon the Trial Court

First ground in the Criminal Transfer Application, which the applicant had subsequently withdrawn, alleged that the Judicial Officer impressed on the parties to enter into a compromise

Such apprehension of accused alone did not articulate evidence of any diversion from the requirement of fair trial and due process on the part of the Judicial Officer

While habitual or repeated diversion from the principles of a fair trial and due process on the part of the Court might trigger a potential cause for transferring a case from one Court to another, there was no such instance

Persistent suggestions, on the part of a Judicial Officer, to the parties to settle the matter out of Court or to enter into a compromise alone did not favour either party

Applicant/complainant and the accused had a family history of discord, distrust and alleged violence between them

In the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents available on record, the alleged repeated suggestions from the Judicial Officer to bring to an end the cycle of hostilities between the parties by way of a compromise were no grounds for claiming bias or prejudice and consequently transferring the case

Once the accused withdrew the first ground, the only ground left for the consideration of the Sessions Court to grant the said application was the second ground that merely stated that accused apprehended danger of injustice in the trial at the hands of the Trial Court, therefore, accused contended that in the interest of justice, Criminal Case should be transferred to any other Court

Said plea, again, was a mere assertion

Mere apprehension of an adverse judicial order does not constitute a sufficient ground justifying the transfer of a case from the Trial Court

Indeed, if such apprehensions and surmises about the judicial process are to be accepted in a routine manner, then it may well make any and all judicial proceedings a never-ending exercise stuck in a vortex of transfer from one Court to the next

With no end to the fear of losing in litigation - a zero-sum game, i.e., fear on the part of either party in a litigation that it may win or lose - parties could not be facilitated by Court to act on such fears by accepting applications to transfer their cases from one Court to another based on the mere perception that the judicial decision from the Court may not be to their liking

While a reasonable apprehension, supported by cogent and logical arguments demonstrating bias or prejudice on the part of the Judicial Officer, can provide sufficient cause to seek the transfer of a case, such approach too must be balanced in the context of creating a fair, impartial, safe and transparent environment for Judicial Officers to administer justice

Vague and casual allegation in the second ground of the Crl. Transfer Application without adequate proof, which was conspicuously lacking, could not be sustained as a sufficient cause for the transfer of the case

Mere apprehension of unfair treatment cannot be a ground for the transfer of a case unless any material or circumstance supports it

Moreover, High Court had also weighed the consequences of the potential transfer of the case back to the original Court and found that no prejudice would be caused

Criminal revision was allowed, accordingly.

2010 GBLR 328 SUPREME-APPELATE-COURT-GILGIT Judicial Precedent

S. 526Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order, 2009, Art.60(13)Transfer of criminal caseConversion of petition into appeal

Petition for leave to appeal had been directed against the order passed by the Chief Court, whereby Chief Court had transferred the sessions case from court at place `D' to that of court at place `G'

Only ground for transfer of the case was that of inconvenience of the complainant and danger to his life at the hands of accused who was stated to be an influential person of the locality

Since both the parties were not residents of the city where the case was under trial, the reasons for transfer of the case were of no substance

Order transferring case passed by the Chief Court, was neither speaking nor based on any reasons

Chief Court having not exercised its jurisdiction judiciously, impugned order was set aside by converting petition for leave to appeal into appeal and allowed.

2008 SCMR 741 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 526Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)Transfer of criminal casePetitioner was aggrieved by order of High Court declining to transfer a Sessions case

Impugned order tended to reflect that Sessions Judge had denied adverse allegations levelled against him and stated that he had not pressurized any party to enter into a compromise

Three witnesses had been examined and on the date of hearing before the High Court, counsel for petitioner did not appear and he wilfully chose to remain absent taking it for granted that hearing would be adjourned

Such was absolutely a wrong concept on the part of the counsel and if he was not diligent, he could not claim adjournment as of right and hearing in the matter

In absence of any ground for interference and no question of law of public importance being spelt out, petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.

1979 SCMR 420 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 526-Transfer of criminal cases-Transfer of case sought on ground of trial Judge having not recorded statements of witnesses according to what they stated-High Court's observations that such aspect of case could be brought to notice of trial Court at conclusion of evidence and if necessary could be verified by re-examining witnesses, held, proper finding, due to petitioner's right to bring his grievance to notice of trial Judge having been recognised-Impugned order of High Court being neither arbitrary nor unreasonable, order in question, held further, calls for no interference.

1979 SCMR 313 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 526-Transfer of criminal cases-Petitioners and respondents very closely related, coming from a very influential family, and petitioners on allegation of one of respondents' men having been killed by petitioners facing trial before Sessions Court-Transfer of case sought by respondents on ground of eye-witnesses having been threatened by petitioners and complaints regarding such threats also allegedly made to authorities concerned-Allegations, though denied by petitioners, but not possible in circumstances to say that High Court's order transferring case to another Court not supported by any material nor High Court required to hold an elaborate enquiry into allegations of respondents-Notice having gone to State and State having not chosen to oppose application, High Court, justified in hearing transfer application even in absence of counsel for State Petitioner's contention that none was there to help or guide defence found incorrect-Points raised in petition for leave not raised before High Court

1977 SCMR 514 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 526(3), (6)-Transfer of criminal cases-Notice-Specific requirement of notice as contained in subsection (6) of S. 526-Refers only to cases where application for transfer made by accused Without expressing any final opinion, however, Supreme Court considered grievance of lack of notice to petitioner before making order of transfer to be agitated in High Court in circumstance.[Notice].

1973 PLD 327 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 526 & 145-Transfer of criminal cases-Principles governing disposal of transfer application.

1973 PLD 678 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 526Transfer of criminal cases

Magistrate rejecting accused's application to summon defence witnesses at State expense although bound under rules to do so

No inference, held, could be drawn of Magistrate's personal bias against accused

Ground urged for transfer being merely on legal plane, petition for transfer of case dismissed.

1969 SCMR 826 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 526-Transfer of criminal case-High Court transferring case from a criminal Court at Sukkur to one at Lahore on reasonable ground raised by applicant that she apprehended forcible kidnapping by the opposite party at Sukkur-Order of transfer not interfered with by Supreme Court.

1969 PLD 1049 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 526Transfer of criminal cases-Maxim: "Justice should not only be done but should also be seen to have been done "Principle to be kept in view in dealing with transfer cases-Reaction of trial Court's action on 'susceptibility of petitioner-Such susceptibility should be of a normal person and not of one having a hyper-sensitive nature-Sufficient grounds not existing to give rise to reasonable apprehension in petitioner's mind that he shall not have fair trial-No ground for transfer .of case, held, made out.

1968 SCMR 381 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 526-Transfer of criminal case-Bare statement of accused that Special Judge during course of trial called accused a "fraud"-Not enough for ordering transfer of case-Special Leave to Appeal refused by Supreme Court.

1967 PLD 1129 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 526-Transfer of criminal case-Powers of High Court based on susceptibilities of litigant public-Determining factor in passing order of transfer; effect that real (not imaginary) circumstances may have created Magistrate granting bail to accused, on same evidence on which High Court only a week earlier had refused bail, and summoning four persons as Court witnesses who were essentially defence witnesses-Circumstances, held, justified transfer of case to another Magistrate.

1965 PLD 182 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 526-Transfer of criminal case-Magistrate personally questioning prosecution witnesses during their examination and refusing to stay supplementary proceedings under S. 107, Cr. P. C. against complainant even after receiving police report in favour of complainant-No ground for believing Magistrate hostile to prosecution-Application for transfer dismissed in limine.