MEHMOOD vs State S — 2024 PLD 684 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

MEHMOOD VS State S. 526---Transfer of a criminal case---Impartiality or bias of a Judge---Judicial proprietary--- Scope--- Grounds raised by the applicant/accused were that the Judicial Officer in connivance with the complainant had geared up the process of recording of evidence without fulfilling the requirement of fair trial and due process; that the Judicial Officer and the counsel for the complainant belonged to the same caste and the petitioner being accused of the case did not expect fair trial due to biasness of the Judicial Officer---Validity---Apprehension of the petitioner about not expecting fair trial on the face of it was not well founded because being caste fellow or from the same brotherhood by a counsel did not mean that the Judicial Officer would lean in favour of the complainant side as otherwise case was decided on the basis of evidential record and material produced by the parties, whereas in order to avert delayed justice expeditious trial was the requirement of law---Petitioner had also filed another application for transfer of another case lodged by a separate complainant wherein grounds for transfer were almost identical which showed the intention of petitioner to overawe the Judicial Officer---On one hand, Judicial Officers were expected to be fair and impartial and on the other hand, it could not be allowed that they might be subjected to undue harassment by way of moving baseless applications seeking transfer of the cases---Outlined grounds in the petition for seeking transfer of the case mainly roamed around the apprehension of unfair treatment due to expected biasness; therefore, it was essential to see the legal value of apprehension in such situation and the concept of biasness---Mere apprehension in the mind of a party about injustice at the hands of Presiding Officer was no ground for transfer of a case---Petitioner had not pointed out any material through which it could be inferred that Magistrate was personally interested in the case or was biased towards the petitioner in any manner---Allegation of bribery was also not made expressly nor advocated vigorously; so much so, it was conceded that trial was at initial stage, therefore, merely on the basis that Magistrate was the caste fellow of counsel for the complainant and was conducting trial expeditiously, alleged biasness could not be anticipated at such stage of the proceedings---Petition was dismissed accordingly.

MEHMOOD vs State S — 2024 PLD 684 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD