Mara khulla ka case lahore main chal raha hai jab ke mere khawand ne mere khalaf sialkot main case kar dia hai .Lahore wala case sialkot kese transfer hu sakta hai
 |
| Transfer Application one city to another city |
Transfer of Case one city to other
Aj hum baat karin ge case ko kese transfer Aik sheher se dosre shehr transfer karwaia ja sakta hai.
Yeh article main aik reader ki call sunnen ke baad likh raha hu ke aap logon ke liye aasani hu jai.wife ne agar aik city me case file kia or husband ne kisi dosri citi main tu us ko kese transfer karwaia ja sakta hai ke wo dono case aik hi city main chalain or do mukhtalif tarah ki judgements se bacha ja sake.
Iss ke liye aap ko High court main Transfer Application deni pare gi.High court
parties ko sunne ke baad faisla de gi or agar aap ke grounds valid hoe tu case transfer kar dia jay ga
Documents
- copy id card
- dono cases ke musdqa naqal
- or apne grounds ko sabit karne ke liye relevent saboot sath lagane hain
For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp
Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people about there rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.
The following judgement main bataya gia hai ke session trial cases district headquarters main chalain ge or tamam accused se mashwara kar ke case district headquarter main send kiye jain ge sawai un cases ke ju hadood ke cases hain ya jin ka trial abhi shroo nahi hoa.
Or baul stage per hain.
Judgement
rm No: HCJD/C-121
ORDER SHEET
LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Crl. Misc. No.76558/T/2022
Muhammad Waqar alias Fauji
Vs. The State etc.
S.No. of order/
proceeding
Date of order/
Proceeding
Order with the signature of Judge, and that of parties or counsel, where necessary
7.3.2023
Ch. Muhammad Ibrahim Goraya, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Rana Tasawar Ali Khan, Deputy Prosecutor General.
Mr Muhammad Rizwan Waseem, Advocate, for Respondent
No.2.
Tariq Saleem Sheikh, J. – Respondent No.2 lodged FIR
No.613/2021 dated 19.12.2021 at Police Station City Shakargarh, District
Narowal, against the Petitioner and two others, including Zahid Hussain and
Irfan alias Panni, accusing them of the murder of Shahid Naseer. The police
investigated the case and submitted a report under section 173 Cr.P.C. before
the Magistrate Section-30, Shakargarh, on 12.10.2022. He submitted the case
(which was flagged as “The State v. Fauji Waqar etc.”) to the Sessions
Judge, Narowal. On 20.10.2022, the latter entrusted it to Mr Asif Bashir,
Additional Sessions Judge, Shakargarh. On 20.10.2022, Mr Asif was on
leave so the police produced the Petitioner in custody before the Duty Judge
at Shakargarh. He summoned co-accused Zahid and Irfan to stand trial. By
this petition under section 526 Cr.P.C., the Petitioner seeks the transfer of the
aforesaid case from the court of Mr Arif Bashir to another court of
competent jurisdiction at the District Headquarters Narowal.
2.
The Petitioner’s grievance is that the instructions issued by this
Court have not been followed for determining the venue of trial in the abovementioned case.
3.
The Petitioner had not impleaded Zahid Hussain and Irfan alias
Panni in this petition. This Court admitted them as Respondents No.3 and 4
by order dated 16.2.2022. They were issued notices but have not shown up to
oppose this petition.
4.
Heard. Record perused.
5.
This Court issued the first instructions regarding the trial of
sessions cases vide Letter No.2071/RHC dated 29.11.1997, which is
reproduced below:
To
All the District & Sessions Judges
in the Punjab.
Dated Lahore the 29th November 1997.
Subject:
TRIAL OF SESSIONS CASES AT THE DISTRICT
HEADQUARTERS
Sir,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and Judges have been pleased
to direct that henceforth all the sessions cases shall be tried at the District
Headquarters. The cases in which trial has not yet commenced shall
stand transferred to the respective District & Sessions Judges for
entrustment to the Additional District and Sessions Judges at the District
Headquarters. However, all those cases in which a charge has been
framed/trial has commenced shall be finalized in the courts in which they
are presently pending.
(Moazzam Hayyat)
Registrar
6.
The above-said directive was followed by Letter
No.2102/RHC/MIT dated 11.12.1997, which read as follows:
LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
No. 2102/RHC/MIT
From
The Registrar,
Lahore High Court,
Lahore.
To
All the District & Sessions Judges
in the Punjab.
Dated Lahore, the 11th December 1997.
Subject:
TRIAL OF SESSIONS CASES AT DISTRICT
HEADQUARTERS
Sir,
In continuation of this Court’s Circular Letter No.
2071/RHC, dated 29.11.1997, I am directed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice
and Judges to say that bail applications in sessions cases shall be heard at
the respective Sub-Divisions only during the stage of investigation, but
once the challan, complete or incomplete, is submitted in Court then the
bail applications shall be disposed of at the District Headquarters.
2.
It is also clarified that all the Hudood cases under
Ordinance VII of 1979 shall be tried at the respective Tehsil
headquarters, as before.
Your obedient servant,
REGISTRAR
6.
The above-said directive was followed by Letter
No.2102/RHC/MIT dated 11.12.1997, which read as follows:
LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
No. 2102/RHC/MIT
From
The Registrar,
Lahore High Court,
Lahore.
To
All the District & Sessions Judges
in the Punjab.
Dated Lahore, the 11th December 1997.
Subject:
TRIAL OF SESSIONS CASES AT DISTRICT
HEADQUARTERS
Sir,
In continuation of this Court’s Circular Letter No.
2071/RHC, dated 29.11.1997, I am directed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice
and Judges to say that bail applications in sessions cases shall be heard at
the respective Sub-Divisions only during the stage of investigation, but
once the challan, complete or incomplete, is submitted in Court then the
bail applications shall be disposed of at the District Headquarters.
2.
It is also clarified that all the Hudood cases under
Ordinance VII of 1979 shall be tried at the respective Tehsil
headquarters, as before.
Your obedient servant,
REGISTRAR
Crl. Misc. No.76558/T/2022
3
7.
Thereafter, in supersession of Letter No.2071/RHC dated
29.11.1997, this Court issued the following direction on 25.5.1999:
LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
No.7886/RHC/MIT
25th May 1999
From
Abdus Salam Khawar,
Member Inspection Team,
Lahore High Court,
Lahore.
To
All the District & Sessions Judges
in the Punjab.
Subject:
TRIAL OF SESSIONS CASES AT SUBDIVISIONAL HEADQUARTERS
In supersession of the Letter No. 2071/RHC dated
29.11.1997, I am directed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice and Judges to say
that ordinarily the trial of sessions cases (except Hudood cases) shall be
conducted at the district headquarters. However, accused will be given
the option of the trial at the Sub-Division at the time of his appearance
before the Magistrate for purpose of Section 190 Cr.P.C. Such an option
shall be duly recorded by the learned Magistrate. In case there is more
than one accused and all the accused do not agree to the trial at SubDivision, the District & Sessions Judge shall, at his discretion, decide the
place of trial.
2.
As regards the bail petitions filed during the
investigation the Circular letter No. 2012/RHC/MIT dated 11.12.1997
shall be followed. Accordingly, the bail applications in the sessions cases
shall be heard at the respective Sub-Divisions only during the stage of
investigation, but once the accused has opted to have his trial at the
Headquarters or Sub-Division, thereafter, bail application shall only be
entertained by the Trial Court. Furthermore, it is clarified that all the
Hudood cases under Ordinance 7 of 1979 shall continue to be tried at the
respective Tehsil Headquarters as before. All concerned be informed
accordingly.
3.
Kindly acknowledge receipt of this letter.
Your obedient servant,
(Member Inspection Team)
8.
According to the above instructions, sessions cases (excluding
Hadood cases) should normally be tried at the District Headquarters.
Nonetheless, when the accused appears before the Magistrate for the purpose
of section 190 Cr.P.C., he should give him the choice of a trial at the subdivision. If there are multiple accused and they all do not consent to the trial
at the sub-division, the Sessions Judge shall decide the place of trial at his
discretion.
9.
In the present case, on 12.10.2022, the police produced the
Petitioner before the Magistrate in custody while Zahid Hussain appeared on
his own because he was on bail. The Magistrate observed that the case wa
Crl. Misc. No.76558/T/2022
4
exclusively triable by the Court of Session and mechanically forwarded it to
the Sessions Judge, Narowal, for “appropriate orders”. As per Letter No.
7886/RHC/MIT dated 25.5.1999, reproduced above, he was obligated to ask
the accused whether they preferred that their trial be held at the District
Headquarters or the Sub-Division when they appeared before him. He was
required to document the fact that he had provided such an option to the
accused. Nothing on the record indicates that he gave the Petitioner and his
co-accused that choice.
10.
The file was placed before the Sessions Judge, Narowal, on
17.10.2022. However, it does not appear from the record that the Petitioner
or his co-accused attended his court. He unilaterally entrusted the case to Mr
Asif Bashir, Additional Sessions Judge, Shakargarh, who fixed 20.10.2022
as the hearing date before him. On the said date, Mr Asif was on leave. The
Duty Judge took up the case and issued a summons to Zahid and Irfan. The
Petitioner was produced before him in custody. The Duty Judge also did not
inquire whether he wanted the trial to be held at the District Headquarters or
the Sub-Division.
11.
Letter No. 7886/RHC/MIT dated 25.5.1999 gives the accused a
valuable right to choose the place of trial which cannot be denied to him. If
the complainant party has any issue, it has a legal remedy under section 526
Cr.P.C.
12.
Since Respondents No.3 and 4 have not contested this petition,
the Petitioner’s request must be granted. Accordingly, the case titled
“The State v. Fauji Waqar etc.” is withdrawn from Mr Asif Bashir and
transferred to the Sessions Judge, Narowal.
13.
Respondent No.2 prays that the transferee court may be directed
to decide the case as soon as possible. The Deputy Prosecutor General has no
objection. Therefore, the Sessions Judge, Narowal, is directed to proceed
with the case expeditiously and ensure its conclusion within six months from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
14.
Disposed of.
(Tariq Saleem Sheikh)
Judge
Naeem
Approved for reporting.
Judge
Meri wife ny case kia hua hai nan nafqa meri ik beti hai meny adalat main bhe kha main isko abad krna chta hon but wo ana nh chti kia ager wo talaq ly to mjhy jo nikah namy main likha hua hai zameen sona hai wo dena pary gha kia
ReplyDeleteg bhai agar wo khud khula le tu pehle tu sab kuch chorna parta tha magar ab kuch trend badla hoa hai khulla ki sorat main bhi court 25 percent se 50 percent haq mahar allow kr deti hain . aap conjugal rights ka dawa karain us se ap ki bachat hu skti hai
Delete