Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Transfer Application No. 103 of 1967, decided on 2nd November 1967.
S. 516‑Transfer of criminal case‑Court at M having normal territorial jurisdiction in case‑Mere assertion by complainant without support of affidavit that trial of case at M will be prejudicial to him‑Additional District Magistrate transferring case from Court at M to that at B without hearing accused‑Order set aside and case remanded.
Sh. Rehman Baksh for Applicants.
M. Haleem, A. A: G. for Respondents
Date of hearing: 2nd November 1967.
This is an application for transfer of a case from the Court of the Civil Judge and F. C. M., Badin on the grounds of convenience and absence of the jurisdiction.
2. The circumstances in which the case was sent to the Court at Badin are that a private complaint under section 302, P. P. C. was filed against the three accused who are the applicant before me. The parties and the witnesses for the complainant reside at village Haji Mewo Bahurgari within territorial jurisdiction of the Court at Math. However, when the complaint was filed, there was a statement, without any affidavit in support of it, that the accused party was very influential and the case should not be tried at Math. It should be mentioned that complaint itself was filed directly before the Additional District Magistrate, Hyderabad. In view of the said statement in the complaint the Additional District Magistrate, Hyderabad sent this case for trial before the learned F. C. M., Tando Bago. The accused then filed an application for transfer from the court upon the grounds that the serishtedar of the learned Magistrate was cousin of the complainant. The matter came before the Additional District Magistrate who transferred the case to Badin. The contention of Mr. Rehman Bakhsh is that if this case is tried at Badin the accused would have to travel 60 miles for each hearing. It is further argued that there was no material before the learned Additional District Magistrate in support of the allegations that the trial of the case at Math would be prejudicial to the complainant. There was just a mere assertion m the complaint without the support of any affidavit and the accused had not been heard in respect of it. I consider that this grievance is well founded. Normally the case had to be tried in the Court at Matli which had territorial jurisdiction. The order dated 5‑9‑67 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Hyderabad is accordingly set aside and the case is sent back to him. He shall now examine the question afresh upon such affidavits as may be filed whether the trial of the case at Maui would not be in the interest of justice. Mr. Rahman Bakhsh stated that soon after this order by the Additional District Magistrate, the same complainant has filed another complaint at Math. This is said to show that the complainant in fact has no real apprehension that he will not get a fair trial at Matli.
3. No witnesses have so far been examined. The case shall go back to the Additional District Magistrate, Hyderabad who after notice to both the parties decide the question whether the case should be tried at a place other than Math.
Case remanded.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer