Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

M­14/13 vs State on 29 May, 2013

                                         1

 THE COURT OF SH. VINOD GOEL, DISTRICT  & SESSIONS 
       JUDGE, SHAHDARA, KKD COURTS, DELHI


M­14/13
Rajeev Sharma
S/o Sh. R.A. Sharma
R/o C­417, 2nd floor &
B­194, 2nd & 3rd floor,
Yojna Vihar, Delhi.                                           .................Petitioner

Vs.


State                                                         .................Respondent
FIR No.18/2013

P.S. Vivek Vihar U/s 448/420 IPC Application under Section 408 Cr.P.C. to transfer Bail Application Order

1. The petitioner / accused Rajeev Sharma has filed this application to transfer his bail application from the court of Sh. Ravinder Dudeja, Ld. ASJ, FTC (E­Court), Shahadara, KKD Courts, M-14/13 Rajeev Sharma Vs. State Page no. 1 of 5 2 Delhi to any other court. It is alleged by the petitioner that his counsel cited number of citations during the arguments but his bail application was dismissed. It is further alleged that he filed 2nd application for bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and his main counsel was not available and the counsel for the complainant put his version that instead of arrest of the petitioner / accused, he got registered a false case against the complainant and the court has observed "Mahesh Ji kuch bhi ho I have passed my order earlier in the application and I have not to change my order case register hone se kya farak pad gaya". It is alleged that the court has passed the order without considering the arguments of his counsel and his bail application may be transferred.

2. As per the report sought from the concerned court, first bail application of petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. vide FIR no.18/13 under Section 448/420 IPC PS Vivek Vihar has been dismissed vide detailed order dated 16.05.2013 and the petitioner filed 2nd application for bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. on 23.05.2013 and on that day Sh. Mahesh Sharma, Advocate appeared for the complainant and Sh. Ashutosh, Advocate, proxy counsel appeared for the petitioner and M-14/13 Rajeev Sharma Vs. State Page no. 2 of 5 3 matter was adjourned to 28.05.2013 since the counsel Sh. R.S. Goswami, Advocate was out of station. It is further reported by the Ld. Presiding Officer that unwanted remarks have been made in para no.13 & 14 of 2nd bail application by the petitioner and the court has been misquoted in para no.4 of present transfer petition and the court has not passed any order in the application in anticipation as alleged in para no.5 of transfer petition and the remarks are unwarranted, false, baseless and mischievous. However, Ld. Presiding Officer observed that since petitioner has no faith in the court it shall not be appropriate for him to hear the bail application.

3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner Sh. R.S. Goswami, Advocate argued that the bail application was earlier dismissed by the said court on 16.05.2013 without any justification and reasoned order and his contentions have not been appreciated and the 2nd bail application filed by the petitioner may be transferred to some other court. Per contra, the Ld. Chief Prosecutor for the State Sh. Ramesh Kumar vehemently opposed the transfer application on the ground that this is a move to pressurize the court in order to obtain bail and should be dismissed. 



M-14/13
Rajeev Sharma Vs. State                                                                                                      Page no. 3 of 5
                                            4

4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the respective contentions of the parties and very carefully perused the material available on record.

5. The first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by the court of Sh. Ravinder Dudeja, Ld. ASJ, FTC (E­Court), Shahadara, KKD Courts, Delhi on 16.05.2013 by a detailed order and even the citations replied upon by him have been cited in para no.2 of the order. The second bail application filed on 23.05.2013 was taken up for consideration for the first time on 24.05.013 by the said court and on the request of the proxy counsel for the petitioner, matter was adjourned for 28.05.2013 for consideration and the Ld. Presiding Officer has reported that he has not passed any order on the application in anticipation as alleged in para no.5 of the present transfer application. This is also reflected from the order sheet dated 24.05.2013 to which there is presentation of correctness. However, as reported by the Ld. Presiding Officer of the concerned court that as petitioner has no faith in his court it shall not be appropriate for him to proceed to hear the application. Hence in view of the desire of the M-14/13 Rajeev Sharma Vs. State Page no. 4 of 5 5 concerned court, I hereby direct that the Application under Section 438 Cr.PC for bail filed by the petitioner is withdrawn from the court of Sh. Ravinder Dudeja, Ld. ASJ, FTC (E­Court), Shahadara, KKD Courts, Delhi and assigned to the Court of Sh. T.S. Kashyap, ASJ, Special Judge NDPS, KKD, Delhi for disposal in accordance with law. Parties shall appear before the transferee court today at 2 pm. Transfer file be consigned to record room.


Announced in open court
on 29th May 2013                                       (Vinod Goel)
                                                District & Sessions Judge 
                                                Shahdara, KKD Courts, Delhi.
                                                       29.05.2013         




M-14/13
Rajeev Sharma Vs. State                                                                                                       Page no. 5 of 5