Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2026 LHC 4800
Court / Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court
Parties: Faisal Manzoor vs District & Sessions Judge etc
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Lahore High Court, officially reported as 2026 LHC 4800. In this matter between Faisal Manzoor and District & Sessions Judge etc, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
COURT: Lahore High Court (Honorable Mr. Justice Farooq Haider) DECISION DATE: 20-07-2026 TAGLINE: Sessions Judge though while acting administratively can initially entrust application under Section: 22-A (6) Cr.P.C. to Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace yet he cannot subsequently transfer the same to another Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace. CASE DETAILS: Criminal Proceedings 41376/26 ============================================================ Form No. HCJD/C-121 ORDER SHEET IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Writ Petition No.41376 of 2026
Faisal Manzoor vs Sessions Judge, etc.
Sr. No. Date of order Order with signature of Judge, and that of parties or counsel, where necessary.
Main Petition and C.M. No.01/2026 20.07.2026 Malik Muhammad Shehzad Awan, Advocate for the petitioner in main petition as well as for the applicant in C.M. No.01/2026. Mr. Mudassar Naveed Chatha , Additional Advocate General, Punjab and Mr. Nisar Ahmad Virk, District Public Prosecutor for the State/ respondent No.4 along with Asif, S.I. Ch. Arshad Iqbal, Advocate for respondent No.2. Nemo for respondent No.3.
Main Petition At the very outset, it has been apprised by learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab that Bilal (now arrayed as respondent No.3 in this petition) has been served with the notice regarding pendency of this petition before this Court for today however he has not come to the Court; he has produced copy of notice containing report in this regard, which has been placed on the record. Instant petition has been repeatedly called however neither respondent No.3 nor anyone else on his behalf has turned up today b efore this Court; therefore, he (respondent No.3) is being proceeded against ex-parte.
2. Through this petition, following prayer has been made:- “Under the circumstances stated above, it is therefore, most respectfully prayed that by allowing the instant writ petition, the impugned order dated 29.06.2026 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Okara / respondent No.1 may kindly be set aside and applicati on filed by the respondent No.2 for transfer of above mentioned petitions u/s 22 -A & 22-B Cr.P .C as well as pre -arrest bail petitions may kindly be dismissed in the interest of justice. It is further prayed that the operation of the impugned order dated 29.06.2026 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Okara/ respondent No.1 may graciously be suspended till the final decision of main writ petition. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be granted to the petitioner.” Writ Petition No.41376/2026 2
3. Brief however necessary facts for disposal of instant petition are that Shahid Manzoor (now arrayed as respondent No.2 in this petition) filed application before learned Sessions Judge, Okara for transfer of six applications filed under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 as well as two applications for pre -arrest bail pending before Mr. Rana Sohail Tariq, learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace, Depalpur (copy of the application is available at page No.8-11 of instant petition) which was allowed vide order dated: 29.06.2026 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Okara (copy of the order is available at Page No.13-15 of the petition and here-in-after to be referred as “Impugned Order”); feeling aggrieved, Faisal Manzoor Advocate (now petitioner in the petition) has challenged the Impugned Order through this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that impugned order is against the law as well as facts therefore same is not sustainable and finally prayed for setting-aside the same. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 while supporting the impugned order submits that Faisal Manzoor (present petitione r) is an Advocate, member of local bar and causing illegal harassment and also issuing threats to Shahid Manzoor (respondent No.2 in this petition); further adds that he (Faisal Manzoor), Bilal (now arrayed as respondent No.3 in this petition) along with o ther co-accused persons caught Shahid Manzoor (respondent No.2/ complainant) in the area of Kachery Chowk, Depalpur, attacked him while armed with different weapons and caused injuries to him as well. Learned counsel finally prayed for dismissal of this petition. 6. Learned District Public Prosecutor has supported the impugned order. 7. Learned Additional Advocate General , Punjab submits that impugned order to the extent of transfer of application filed under Section: 22-A (6) Cr.P.C. is without jurisdiction whereas same to the extent of transfer of applications for pre-arrest bail has been passed in accordance with law as well as facts of the case. 8. Arguments heard and available record appended with the petition perused. Writ Petition No.41376/2026 3
9. So far as transfer of application filed under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 pending before an Ex-officio Justice of the P eace to another Ex-officio Justice of the Peace is concerned , it is necessary to mention here that Section: 526 and 52 8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 deal with the transfer of legal proceedings but from the “court”, therefore, first of all, it will have to be decided that whether Ex-officio Justice of the Peace is “court”? and for the said purpose Section: 19 & 20 of the Pakistan Penal Code , 1860 as well as Section:6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 are relevant which are hereby reproduced below for ready reference:- Section: 19 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 “19. "Judge". The word "Judge" denotes not only every person, who is officially designated as a Judge, but also every person; who is empowered by law to give, in any legal proceeding, civil or criminal, a definitive judgment or a judgment, or a which, if not appeale d against, would be definitive, or a judgment which, if confirmed by some other authority, would be definitive; or who is one of a body of persons, which body of persons is empowered by law to give such a Judgment.”
Section: 20 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 “20. "Court of Justice". The words "Court of Justice" denote a Judge who is empowered by law to act judicially alone, or a body of Judges which is empowered by law to act judicially as a body, when such Judge or body of Judges is acting judicially.
Section:6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 “[6 Classes of Criminal Courts and Magistrates: (1) Besides the High Courts and the Courts constituted under any law other than this Code for the time being in force, there shall be two classes of Criminal Courts in Pakistan, namely:- (i) Courts of Session; (ii) Courts of Magistrate.
[(2) There shall be the following classes of Magistrate, namely:- (i) Magistrate of the First Class; (ii) Magistrate of the Second Class; and (iii) Magistrate of the Third Class.]”
Section: 19 and 20 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 define “ Judge” and the “Court of Justice ”, respectively whereas Section: 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 shows the “ Classes of Criminal Courts and Writ Petition No.41376/2026 4
Magistrates”. Perusal of Section: 19, 20 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 as well as Section: 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 makes it crystal clear that Ex-officio Justice of the Peace is not the “court” ; therefore, S ection: 526 & 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 cannot be invoked for transfer of any application filed under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 from an Ex-officio Justice of the Peace to another Ex-officio Justice of the Peace and in this regard cases of “UMER DARAZ versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE and others” [2021 MLD 2077] and “ABID HUSSAIN versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, EX -OFFICIO JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, SARGODHA and 5 others” [PLD 2023 Lahore 86 ] can also be referred. As per Section: 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908, by virtue of their respective offices, the Sessions Judges and on nomination by them, the Additional Sessions Judges are Justices of the Peace within and for the whole of the District of the province in which they are serving and Section : 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 is also hereby reproduced for ready reference: Section: 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 “[25. Ex-Officio Justices of the Peace : By virtue of their respective offices, the Sessions Judges and on nomination by them, the Additional Sessions Judges, are Justices of the Peace within and for whol e of the District of the Province in which they are serving.]”
Even administratively, after initial entrustment of the application filed under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 to an Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace, Sessions Judge cannot reassign the same i.e. he cannot withdraw or recall the same from said Ex- Officio Justice of the Peace and entrust it to another Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace. Now another question arises that if application pending before Ex- officio Justice of the Peace under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 cannot be transferred under any provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908, can it be transferred in any other way? In order to find its answer, Latin maxim “Ubi jus ibi remedium” has to be examined which means that where there is a wrong, there is a remedy and Writ Petition No.41376/2026 5
the maxim is based on the premise that where a person has a right, there must be means provided to him/her to ensure proper exercise or enjoyment of such rights. It is useless to imagine and think of a right without a remedy. However, such a right must be legally recognized by the statute. The functions of Ex-officio Justice of the Peace as mentioned in Clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of sub section (6) of Section :22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 are quasi-judicial as he entertains application, examines the record, hears the parties, passes order and issues direction with due application of mind and in this regard, case of “YOUNAS ABBAS and others versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAKW AL and others” (PLD 2016 Supreme Court 581 ) can be authoritatively referred. Furthermore, afore-mentioned proceedings conducted by Ex-officio Justice of the Peace may ultimately lead to the trial of case and serve as the initial, pre-trial legal mechanism to ensure that criminal allegations are registered through formal F.I.R. and investigated properly, and the pathway from order of Ex-officio Justice of the Peace to an actual trial follows the specific sequence as mentioned below:- “That if police refuses to register the case, on the application of aggrieved party, ex-officio Justice of the Peace has authority to examine the facts and order Station House Officer of Police Station(concerned) to register FIR, and once FIR is registered in compliance of said direction, police conducts investigation which includes collection of evidence, recording the statements of witnesses, collecting forensic, medical and documentary proofs, arrest of accused(if necessary), and then submission of report under section:173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 before the magistrate/court for trial and court may after taking cognizance commence the trial”.
Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace also issues direction on complaint regarding transfer of investigation as well as on complaint qua neglect, failure or excess committed by police authority with respect to its function and duty. And in such functions of Ex-officio Justice of the Peace, if any party genuinely apprehends that same are not being performed fairly and legal right is going to be infringed, then neither such situation can be left unattended nor the party can be left remediless because Article 4 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (here-in-after to be referred as the Constitution) necessitates “Treatment in accordance with law” i.e. everyone is to be dealt with due process as per law regarding his legal rights and further ensures that legal and administrative actions must be impartial, transparent and followed by Writ Petition No.41376/2026 6
the established procedures as well as settled principles of law on the subject, and Article 10 A of the Constitution requires the fair trial as well as due process and its spirit can be safely extended even to the investigation as well as pre-trial legal proceedings, therefore, the party in view of Ubi jus ibi remedium has the remedy by way of filing petition before the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution for transfer of application under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 pending before an Ex-officio Justice of the Peace to another Ex-officio Justice of the Peace because it is well settled that when there is no remedy available in the statute, then jurisdiction of High Court under Article 199 of the constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 can be invoked for enforcement of legal rights as well as to remedy their infringement and to undo the wrong. As discussed above, learned Sessions Judge , Okara w as having no jurisdiction to withdraw applications filed under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 pending before Mr. Rana Sohail Tariq, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Depalpur/Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace as well as entrust the same to another Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace, therefore, impugned order to said extent i.e. transfer of said applications has been passed without jurisdiction hence same is not sustainable and thus hereby recalled/set aside. As far as impugned order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Okara to the extent of transfer of applications for pre-arrest bail pending before the Court of Mr. Rana Sohail Tariq, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Depalpur to the Court of Syed Shahzad Muzaffar Hamdani, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Renala Khurd is concerned, it is relevant to mention here that Sessions Judge has the jurisdiction to pass such order under Section: 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 and in this regard case of “Mian ZAHEER ABBAS RABBANI versus The STATE and others” [PLD 2025 Lahore 98] can be safely referred; respondent No.2 filed application for transfer of applications for pre-arrest bail on the ground that applicant/accused in the applications for pre-arrest bail is an Advocate, who is member of local bar , and causing harassment to him and he is apprehending murderous assault at Tehsil Head Quarter, Depalpur, and though merely on the ground that one of the party is an Advocate or member of the local bar, case cannot be transferred from one Court to another yet each case has its own facts and circumstances, and in this case, one party i.e. respondent No.2 in this petition claims that the other party/ Writ Petition No.41376/2026 7
opponent is advocate, member of local bar where subject matter/litigation is pending, and causing harassment and issuing threats to him and also refers the case already registered vide FIR No.612/26 at Police Station: City Depalpur regarding attack made by Faisal Manzoor (petitioner) along with others upon him on 25.05.2026, in the area of Kuthchery Chowk, Depalpur when he went there to join investigation of case arising out of FIR No.416/26 registered at Police Station: City Depalpur, hence, keeping in view peculiar circumstances of the subject matter and nature of the accusation between the parties mentioned in FIR No.416/26, FIR No.612/26 and FIR No.708/26 (which was recorded on the application of wife of Shahid Manzoor) registered at Police Station: City Depalpur (available at Page No.16, 17 and 18 of the petition) as well as for the safe administration of justice , order qua withdrawal of applications for bail from the Court of Mr. Rana Sohail Tariq, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Depalpur and entrustment of the same to the Court of Syed Shahzad Muzaffar Hamdani, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Renala Khurd has been found as perfectly valid and quite in accordance with law as well as facts because by now it is well settled that justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done. In view of what has been discussed above, instant petition stands accepted to the extent of order qua transfer of applications under Section: 22-A (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1908 however it is dismissed to the extent of order regarding transfer of applications for bail. C.M. No.01/2026 Since main petition has already been decided today therefore instant miscellaneous application has lost its relevance and the same stands disposed of accordingly. (Farooq Haider) Judge APPROVED FOR REPORTING.
(Farooq Haider) Judge This order has been dictated, pronounced, prepared and signed on 20.07.2026. Kashif