Mushtaq Hussain Khan V. Mir Khan Khetran and another,

PCrLJ 2025 1986Balochistan High CourtCriminal Law2025

Bench: Muhammad Aamir Nawaz Rana

Share on WhatsApp
2025 P Cr. L J 1986 [Balochistan] Before Muhammad Aamir Nawaz Rana, J MUSHTAQ HUSSAIN KHAN ---Applicant Versus MIR KHAN KHETRAN and another ---Respondents Crl. Transfer Application No. 319 of 2025, decided on 5th August, 2025. Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) --- ----S. 526---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 489 -F---Transfer application ---Imminent danger to the life of petitioner ---Applicant through application under S. 526, Cr.P.C., sought transfer of case from one Court to another Court ---Contention of the applicant was that he had imminent danger to his life in case he proceeded to District B, therefore his trial be transferred to the competent Court of law at District "Q"---Validity --- Admitted feature of the case was that the applicant was President of a District "Bh" (Province of Punjab) and had expressed apprehension that there was a serious threat to his life if he pursued the matter before the Judicial Magistrate, at "B"---Complainant had admitted that three other FIRs were also lodged by him in city 'I' ---In such view of the matter, why present FIR was lodged by complainant at "B", was a matter that required consideration by the Trial Court, as it was apparent that although complainant belonged to District "B", but he was currently residing in city "I" ---While deciding applications for the transfer of cases,the genuine reservations of the parties must be considered ---Article 10 -A of the Constitution guaranteed the right to a fair trial and due process of law ---If any party, due to unavoidable circumstances, was unable to attend legal proceedings in a particular area and expressed his/her reservations, then such apprehensions should not be brushed aside or ignored; rather the attending peculiar circumstances of each case have to be considered while deciding matters regarding transfer of cases from one place to another ---In the attending circumstances of the case and in order to ensure fair trial and due process of law, as envisaged under Art.10 -A of the Constitution, the trial of the case was transferred from the Court of the Judicial Magistrate at "B" to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate at "Q" ---Petition was allowed, in circumstances. Mohibullah Mengal for Applicant. Syed Kamal Hussain, State Counsel. Muhammad Umar Khetran for Respondent No. 1/Complainant. ORDER MUHAMMAD AAMIR NAWAZ RANA, J .---Through this application, the applicant seeks transfer of trial of a criminal case titled The State v. Mushtaq Ahmed, in FIR No.29/2024, dated 27.07.2024, registered under section 489- F P.P.C at Police Station Rakhni, District Barkhan, from the Court of Judicial Magistrate Rakhni at Barkhan to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Quetta on the ground of imminent danger to his life in case he proceeds to District Barkhan (Balochistan) to appear before the competent Court of law to defend his case. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case with mala fide intention. According to learned counsel, the applicant faces serious threats to his life from the complainant. Learned counsel further contended that the complainant is a resident of Islamabad, and has lodged three other FIRs in Islamabad, however, the present FIR was intentionally lodged by him in his home district to serve ulterior motives. Learned counsel further argued that the applic ant hails from Punjab, and given the current law and order situation in Barkhan, it would be life - threatening for the applicant to pursue his case in Barkhan. Per learned counsel, in such circumstances, the applicant has also filed Criminal Pre - Arrest Bail Application No. 279/2025 before this Court. 3. Conversely, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 (complainant) strongly refuted the contentions of learned counsel for the applicant and argued that the allegation made by the applicant that the complainant lodged the FIR in his home district to serve ulterior motives lacks any factual basis and is merely an attempt to divert attention from the merits of the case. Learned counsel further contended that the applicant's claim of life threats is speculative and unsupported by any concrete evidence. Lastly, learned counsel contended that the application for the transfer of the case be dismissed, as there is no justifiable reason to transfer the case to another jurisdiction. 4. Learned State counsel also opposed the transfer application and requested for its dismissal. Arguments heard. Record perused. 5. The admitted feature of the case is that the applicant is a resident of Bhakkar (Province of Panjab) and has expressed his apprehension that there is a serious threat to his life if he pursues the matter before the Judicial Magistrate, Rakhni, at Barkhan. Learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant has admitted that three other FIRs were also lodged by respondent No.1/complainant in Islamabad. In such view of the matter, why this FIR was lodged by respondent No.1/complainant at Rakhni is a matter that requires consideration by the trial Court, as it is apparent that, although respondent No.1/complainant belongs to Rakhni, but he is currently residing in Islamabad. 6. While deciding applications for the transfer of cases, the genuine reservations of the parties must be considered. Article 10- A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (the 'Constitution') guarantees the right to a fair trial and due process of law. If any party, due to unavoidable circumstances, is unable to attend legal proceedings in a particular area and expresses his/her reservations, then such apprehensions should not be brushed aside or ignored; rather the attending peculiar circumstances of each case have to be considered while deciding matters regarding transfer of cases from one place to another. 7. It has been informed by learned counsel for the applicant that report under section 512 Cr.P.C. has been submitted to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Rakhni at Barkhan by the Investigation Officer. In the attending circumstances of the case and in order to ensure fair trial and due process of law, as envisaged under Article 10- A of the Constitution, the trial of the case titled The State v. Mushtaq Ahmed, in FIR No. 29/2024, dated 27.07.2024, registered under section 489 -F P.P.C at Police Station Rakhni, District Barkhan, is hereby transferred from the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Rakhni at Barkhan to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate -I, Quetta. Copy of this order be sent to both the Courts for information and compliance. JK/103/Bal. Application allowed.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Re-Investigation can be permitted under special circumstances

PLJ 2020 · Balochistan High Court · 2020

Importance of 342 Statement in a Criminal Trial

PLJ 2018 SC 453 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Prosecution must establish that chain of custody was unbroken, unsuspicious, indubitable, safe and secure

PLJ 2018 SC (Cr.C.) 90 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Domicile and Residence Certificate are different

PLJ 2013 · Balochistan High Court · 2013

Pakistan - The Registration Act 1908

Balochistan High Court · 2012