Transfer of case

Transfer of criminal case is justified only if the superior Court is convinced that there is a reasonable apprehension in the mind of any party that the trial Court would not act fairly and impartially. Muhammad Farooq v. State 2002 SCR 367 (C)
There is hardly any concept of Transfer of case from one Judge of superior Court to another or to insist upon the reconstitution of the bench unless the Judge himself decides to do so for certain reasons — The application moved by Dr. Muhammad Bashir Goraya for reconstitution of Bench is not only mala fide but is belated and after-thought — If this be the position then every litigant whose case because of its inherent defects is likely to fail will come forward and knock the door of the Court at the end of the day for reconstitution of the bench and will amount to an unending precedent which is neither desirable nor fair or proper — The language used by Dr. Muhammad Bashir Goraya in his application for reconstitution of bench and in his statement is crude, scandalous and indicative of scandalizing the authority of the Court and to lower down its prestige in the eye of law — This Court should have initiated the contempt proceedings. Al-Khair University & others v. Al-Khair Trust of Pakistan and others 2003 SCR 180 (C)
Parties belong to district Kotli — Writ was filed at district Mirpur — Application was moved for transfer of case to district Kotli — High Court transferred the case to district kotli — Objection that no eminent Advocate is available at Kotli is no ground for transfer of case — Held: Kotli circuit has been established for hearing cases pertaining to Kotli District. Writ was wrongly filed at Mirpur circuit — High Court righty transferred the case to Kotli District. Muhammad Riaz v. Muhammad Sadique & others 2008 SCR 287 (A)
Appellants filed objections that they were poor ladies and unable to engage some other counsel at Rawalkot — The objections were neither considered nor heard the counsel for the appellants on the transfer application — The case was transferred on the request of one party, which is unwarranted — Both the parties engaged counsel at Muzaffarabad, only arguments were to be heard — The learned Chief Justice should not have transferred the case to Rawalakot Circuit without any reasonable justification — Order of the High Court vacated. Baggo Begum & 2 others v. Muhammad Ghazi & 4 others 2008 SCR 396 (A)
Ground made basis for transfer of the case is that the principal accused remained absconded for a period of 10 years and the District Criminal Court, Bhimber, has admitted him the bail, therefore the case may be transferred — Held: Such like ground cannot be made basis for transfer of the case — Further held: If a party is aggrieved of the order of the Court, he may avail the remedy under law. Nasar Ullah Khan v. Shahbaz Ashraf & others 2014 SCR 362 (B) PLD 1973 SC 327, ref.
It is settled law that the transfer of the case cannot be claimed as a matter of routine or at the will of any party unless it is apparent on the face of the record that the parties seeking the transfer as they could not get the fair trial. Nasar Ullah Khan v. Shahbaz Ashraf & 5 others 2014 SCR 362 (A) 2004 SCMR 261, 2001 SCMR 905 ref.
Transfer of case — reasonable grounds — there must be reasonable apprehension in the mind of a party that the Court would not be able to act fairly and impartially in the matter. If the apprehension being expressed is really such as a ‘reasonable man’ might justifiably be expected to have, the Court should transfer the case. Held: mere apprehension in the mind of a party that he will not get justice at the hands of Presiding Officer of the Court is no ground for transfer of the case. Further held: the apprehension must be reasonable. Nasar Ullah Khan v. Shahbaz Ashraf & 5 others 2014 SCR 362 (C) 2001 P.Cr.L.J. 1650 & 1993 P.Cr.L.J. 1362.
Transfer of criminal case — reasonable grounds — word ‘reasonable’ — denotes that the material should be of such a character which would satisfy the objective test that a person after going through such material must come to the conclusion that the apprehension is well founded. It should not be based on apprehensions or presumptions and on the imaginary grounds. Nasar Ullah Khan v. Shahbaz Ashraf & 5 others 2014 SCR 362 (D)