The brief facts of the case are that an F. I. R. Was lodged against respondents 1 to 7 on 1st January, 19.-8 by the petitioner under sections 302/ 452/148 and 149, P. P. C. At Police Station Shorkot, District Jhang. After due completion of the investigation challan was submitted before the Magistrate concerned, who forwarded the same to the Court of Session Judge, Jhang. The case is still pending adjudication as no date has yet been fixed for its hearing.
2. The incident giving rise to the F. I. R. Occurred on 1-1-1978 between 8-30 and 9-00 p.m. At village Budh Rajbana within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Sborkot. Sajid Abbas, deceased, son of Muhammad Arif Khan, &xM. L. A., Punjab, went to the village along with his parents at about 8-30 p.m. When he was at the house of his sister in the village he was informed by his servant that Najam Abbas, grand son of Muhammad Arif Khan, whose father has since died, had come to see him and was waiting outside. At this Sajid Abbas came out to see Najam Abbas and took him to the bedroom of his own house. His parents, his sister Tahira Begum and her husband Manawar Ali Khan, who is petitioner herein, also followed him. According to the F. I. R., Najam Abbas was served with tea. Sajid Abbas, deceased, during the time when they were taking tea went inside the house to fetch some biscuits. As soon as he came back to the bedroom and closed the door his shrieks were heard by the petitioner and other members of the family. They immediately opened the door with a push and found that Najam Abbas, Manzar Abbas and Sardar Abbas who were armed with knife, churri and knife, respectively, were inflicting injuries upon the body of the deceased while Zulqarnain accused-respondent was holding the deceased by the woollen scarf around his neck.
The other three accused-respondents were found to be standing at the door of the adjoining room being armed with balams. After having killed Sajid Abbas they all fled away through the back door.
3. As the above facts would show, both the parties are closely related to each other and Muhammad Arif Khan, father of the deceased and grandfather of accused-respondents 1 to - 3, is their common ancestor. He and his wife are eye-witnesses in this case. His daughter Tahira Begum as well as the petitioner, who is his son-in-law, are also eye-witnesses.
It may be mentioned here that Muhammad Arif Khan has two wives, Ghulam Fatima and Jamila Begum. Ghulam Fatima gave birth to a son named Khadim Hussain, who has since died.
Respondents 1 to 3 are his sons while Sajid Abbas is from his second wife Jamila Begum. There was thus dispute between the deceased and the aforesaid accused persons with regard to inheritance of landed property.
4. It has been urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if trial takes place at Jhang then both the parties being quite influential and belonging to the same place, there is every likelihood that supporters from both sides would visit the Court premises in large numbers and since two ladies are to be examined as prosecution witnesses any indecent remark by the opposite side may further aggravate the situation. It is contended that the petitioner as well as the other P. Ws. Have already been threatened with dire consequences if they depose in favour of the prosecution story and as a result of such threats ladies belonging to the petitioner's side have been removed from Jhang to Lahore. It is submitted that report to that effect was lodged with Police Station, Jhang. It is also submitted the some suspicious persons visited the house of Fiaz Ali P. W. On 25-1-197 at Gulberg, Lahore, where the lady witnesses are residing at present. The local Police at Gulberg was informed about this incident. It is sub mitt that atmosphere at Jhang on account of this murder, so far as the party to the case are concerned, is most unsafe and not congenial and on account of that it is not possible for the witnesses, especially the lady witnesses, to depose correctly before the trial Court.
5. The learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently opposed the application for transfer of the case. According to him, the apprehensions expressed on behalf of the petitioner, as mentioned above, are unfounded. He has relied upon Manzoor Ahmad v. State (I) and Muhammad Nawaz v.
Ghulam Qadir and 3 others (2). In the first case the only ground urged for transfer was that the accused party was very influential, had already won-over one of the witnesses and was likely to win-over the remaining two eye-witnesses. Since apprehension was found without any corroboration, therefore, the application was 'dismissed. In the other case transfer was sought on the basis of allegations of political enmity. The applicant in that case was Kamdar of Air Marshall (Rtd.) M. Asghar Khan and had alleged that the offence subject-matter of the application had been committed at the instance of Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, then President of Pakistan in 1972. Since the allegation levelled in this behalf was not corroborated by any evidence, whatsoever, therefore, transfer of the case was refused.
6. However, this is not the position in the present case. After the eyewitnesses were threatened by the accused party they were removed from Jhang to Lahore and report in this behalf was lodged with the police station concerned. Even thereafter some suspicious persons were found roaming around the house in Gulberg where lady witnesses are residing at present. Again local police was informed about this incident. It is admitted that both the parties weigh considerable influence in District Jhang and on account of that it is very much likely that large number of their supporters may visit the Court premises when trial of the case is held. They can come
(1) 1975 P Cr. IL J 520(2) 1975 P Cr. L J 676 to blows on account of being very near to each other and may further aggravate the situation. The lady witnesses, as alleged by the petitioner, may not feel safe in such an atmosphere so as to depose without any pressure and coercion. In such a situation it would be proper to transfer the case from District Jhang to some other District.
7. In Kadardad Khan and another v. State (Law Notes 1974 Kar. 468), large number of persons from the complainant party used to attend the proceedings on every hearing. The petitioner, who made an application for transfer of the case, felt insecure and as such was provided with a police guard under the orders of the Resident Magistrate. The case was transferred on the ground that trial should take place in a calm atmosphere where the parties have nothing else to fear except the awe and majesty of the justice and law ; and further if the parties feel bodily violence that would shake the very foundation of justice because it creates a feeling that a mock trial may take place.
Similar view was taken in Hussain Bakhsh and another v. Ghulam Mustafa Khan Niazi and another (1974 P Cr. L J 116). In that case both the parties had enmity against each other, as in the present case. The petitioner in that case and his mother and sister, who were P. Ws., had shown their inability to attend the Court at Mianwali as the other party had openly threatened them with dire consequences. It was alleged, as in the present case, that their lives, as such, were in danger in that District. Keeping in view the situation as mentioned above the case was transferred to another District. In Haji Ali Ahmad v. State and 8 others (1970 P Cr. L J 493) also similar view was taken. The case was transferred from Nawab Shah District to Hyderabad District on the ground that the witness Mst. Sbaram Khatoon might be subjected to violence if she went to Nawab Shah District.
8. In view of the above, the case titled, "State v. Najam Abbas, etc." pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Jhang is hereby withdrawn from that Court and entrusted to the Court of Sessions Judge, Lahore for trig purposes.
The Cr. Miscellaneous is hereby accepted without any order as to costs.