Summary: (a) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898—S. 94—Scope and interpretation—Power of trial court to summon judicial record—Timing and relevance— Under Section 94 Cr.P.C., a trial court has the authority to summon any document or record "whenever" its production is necessary or desirable for the purposes of any investigation, inquiry, or trial. This power is not constrained by the stage of proceedings and may be invoked at any time, provided the court is satisfied that such document or thing is essential for just adjudication. In the present case, summoning the judicial record of FIR No. 501/2021 by the Magistrate trying the complaint case was held to be within jurisdiction and necessary for fair determination of the complaint arising from the same occurrence. Cited Cases: Shakeel Akhtar v. The State (2023 SCMR 1676) Muhammad Asif Ali Usama v. The State (2022 PCr.LJ 59) (b) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898—Ss. 528 & 94—Summoning of record vs. transfer of proceedings—Distinction—Jurisdictional validity— Summoning a judicial record under S. 94 Cr.P.C. does not amount to a transfer of proceedings under S. 528 Cr.P.C. The Court clarified that calling for the record of a case pending before another court does not signify or require a formal transfer, as long as the summoned record serves evidentiary or adjudicative purposes and the summoning court is not assuming jurisdiction over the other case. The petitioner’s objection conflating summoning with transfer was held misconceived. (c) Cross/counter cases—Parallel trials in Magistrate and Sessions Courts—Procedure and precedence— Where two counter cases arise out of the same occurrence but are triable by different courts (e.g., complaint before Magistrate and challan case before Sessions), the trial before the Magistrate must ordinarily await the conclusion of the Sessions trial. The rationale is to avoid conflicting decisions and maintain judicial consistency. However, joint or side-by-side trials are not mandatory and depend on the facts. The Court relied on a series of precedents to reiterate that the Magistrate should not proceed independently while the Sessions case is ongoing. Cited Cases: Muhammad Sadiq v. The State (PLD 1971 SC 713) Khair Din v. Inayat (1974 SCMR 140) Rafaqat Ali v. Hidayat Ali (1986 PCr.LJ 989) Syed Muhammad Hussain Shah v. Abdul Hamid (1981 SCMR 361) Mumtaz v. Mansoor Ahmad (1984 SCMR 221) (d) Adjudicative discretion—Procedural fairness—Neutral role of court in criminal justice— The trial court is a neutral arbiter obligated to ascertain the truth, irrespective of whether the evidence sought benefits the prosecution or the defence. Courts may summon any material, document, or record relevant to the inquiry or trial. Such powers reflect the court’s inquisitorial function, even within an adversarial system, when necessary to do justice. The object of Section 94 Cr.P.C. is to ensure substantive fairness, not to facilitate either party. Disposition: Criminal revision dismissed. Trial court’s act of summoning judicial record upheld as lawful, necessary, and within jurisdiction under S. 94 Cr.P.C. Magisterial proceedings shall await conclusion of Sessions trial in line with precedent.

Summary: The applicant filed an application under Section 526 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 for transfer of pre-arrest bail, whereby the applicant has sought withdrawal of the pre-arrest bail from the court of Mr. Muhammad Sajjad Hussain Khan, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tandlianwala, District Faisalabad and its transfer to any other court of competent jurisdiction at Faisalabad or any other Districts/Tehsil Courts.----------Section 528 (1-A) Cr.P.C. is related to the power of the Sessions Judge to withdraw cases and appeals. This power is conferred on the Sessions Judge presiding over the Court of Session.----------- Section 528 (1-A) Cr.P.C. provides that the power of transferring a criminal case from one criminal court to another in the Sessions division is to be exercised only if it is expedient for the end of justice. It does not require an elaborate discussion to hold that it is a judicial exercise of power. ------------Any time before the trial or hearing of the case or appeal, the Sessions Judge is also empowered to withdraw such cases. That power conferred on the Sessions Judge is meant in the interests of the litigant public and also to lessen the burden of the High Court, lest, for every transfer of a criminal case or appeal in a sessions division, the litigant public will always have to approach the High Court.--------------------------Since the application for bail in a case is part of the case, therefore, before the commencement of the trial, the application for bail pending before any Additional Sessions Judge can be recalled by the Sessions Judge from the cause list of learned Additional Sessions Judge, and he can hear the same himself or make it over to any other Additional Sessions Judge for hearing.--------------Similarly, before the commencement of trial, Sessions Judge may withdraw the case from cause list of learned Additional Sessions Judge and he can hear the same himself or make it over to any other Additional Sessions Judge for hearing; before hearing of the appeal, Sessions Judge may withdraw the appeal from cause list of learned Additional Sessions Judge and he can hear the same himself or make it over to any other Additional Sessions Judge for hearing. -----------However, if the trial has commenced, then the case cannot be withdrawn from the Additional Sessions Judge by the Sessions Judge, and, at that stage the application for bail pending before the Additional Sessions Judge can also not be withdrawn, and for that purpose, the relevant forum would be the High Court.-----------As in the instant case, since the facts and law are intertwined in the pre-arrest bail petition, the petitioner is certainly free to move the Sessions Judge under Section 528 Cr.P.C. for withdrawing and transferring the petition to another Additional Sessions Court so that it can be heard and decided.-------With these observations, petition stands disposed of. (a) Jurisdiction of Sessions Judge to Transfer Cases – Section 528 Cr.P.C: Under Section 528(1A) Cr.P.C., a Sessions Judge has the authority to recall and transfer cases or appeals from one Additional Sessions Judge to another within the same Sessions division before the commencement of trial or hearing of the appeal. The power under Section 528 Cr.P.C. is administrative in nature, aimed at the efficient distribution of cases within the Sessions Court. A Sessions Judge may exercise this power to ensure the ends of justice and facilitate fair trial proceedings. The Lahore High Court overruled the precedent set in PLD 2020 Lahore 382 (Naveed Hussain v. The State), which previously limited the Sessions Judge’s power in such matters. (b) High Court’s Power to Transfer Cases – Section 526 Cr.P.C: Section 526 Cr.P.C. empowers the High Court to transfer cases or appeals from one subordinate criminal court to another where it is expedient for the ends of justice. The High Court may exercise this power if it finds: That a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had. That a complex question of law is involved. That the transfer would serve the general convenience of parties or witnesses. The application for transfer under Section 526 Cr.P.C. must be supported by an affidavit and filed with prior notice to the Public Prosecutor. (c) Additional Sessions Judges and Their Jurisdiction – Sections 9 & 193 Cr.P.C: The Additional Sessions Judge is empowered to hear only those cases entrusted to him by the Sessions Judge as per Section 9 & 193 Cr.P.C.. The Sessions Judge retains the overriding authority to allocate, recall, or transfer cases for trial among Additional Sessions Judges. The Lahore High Court clarified that an Additional Sessions Judge is not subordinate to the Sessions Judge in judicial matters but remains under administrative oversight regarding case allocation. (d) Legal Principles Derived from Bail Proceedings – Section 528 Cr.P.C: Bail proceedings, though interlocutory in nature, form an integral part of the case and are thus subject to transfer under Section 528 Cr.P.C. The Lahore High Court emphasized that before the commencement of the trial, a Sessions Judge may withdraw bail petitions from an Additional Sessions Judge and assign them elsewhere in the same division. Once a trial has commenced, however, such transfer is restricted, and only the High Court can exercise transfer jurisdiction. (e) Constitutional and Legislative Intent: Article 37(d) of the Constitution of Pakistan ensures the right to expeditious and inexpensive justice, which is reinforced by legislative provisions enabling easier access to justice. The introduction of Sections 528 (1A & 1B) Cr.P.C. aligns with the principle of decentralized justice administration by granting Sessions Judges localized authority to manage caseload distribution effectively. ---Disposition: The transfer application was disposed of, allowing the petitioner to approach the Sessions Judge for relief under Section 528 Cr.P.C.. The Lahore High Court directed immediate circulation of this judgment to all Sessions Judges in Punjab for compliance and awareness.