Uttarakhand High Court
State Of Uttarakhand vs Narpal Singh S/O Sher Singh on 15 March, 2012
Author: Prafulla C. Pant
Bench: Prafulla C. Pant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
Criminal Reference No. 01 of 2012
(Under Section 395 of Cr.P.C.)
State of Uttarakhand.
.........Petitioner
Versus
1. Narpal Singh S/o Sher Singh
2. Smt. Prem Kaur W/o Narpal Singh
Both R/o Gan Gram: PipalShana, P.O. Haldua,
P.S. Ramnagar, District Nainital.
......Respondents
Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State.
Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.
Heard.
2) This is a reference made by Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, vide his letter dated 19.01.2012, stating that the place of incident in respect of which Sessions Trial No. 311 of 2010, State Vs. Narpal Singh and another, relating to offences punishable under Section 498A/ 376 I.P.C. and one punishable under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station- Kichha, is pending, lies within a territorial limits of District Nainital.
3) Sub-Section (1) of Section 395 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, (for short Cr.P.C.) allows a 2 court to make reference for decision of High Court as to the vires of a provision of law, where such court has the opinion that particular provision appears to be ultravires, but not declared so by any court. There is no such situation in the present case. Nor, the trial court has referred to examine vires of any provision of law.
4) Sub-Section (2) of Section 395 of Cr.P.C. allows that court of Sessions to refer any question of law for a decision of High Court, but in the present case, no question of law has been framed by the learned Sessions Judge, while making the reference. As such, in the eyes or law, the reference letter sent by the learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, is not a reference but simply a report that the place of incident in a matter regarding which Sessions Trial No. 311 of 2010 (arisen out of Crime No. 138 of 2010, Police Station -Kichha) is pending, lies within the territorial limits of District Nainital.
5) In the above circumstances, this Court thinks it just and proper to exercise its powers under sub- Section (2) of Section 407 read with Section 178 and Section 482 of Cr.P.C. From the First Information Report itself it is clear that alleged incident of rape has taken place in Village- Haldua, within the limits of Police Station Ramnagar (District Nainital). Said village is the in-law's place of the complainant. The complainant has 3 also alleged that she was subjected to harassment due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.
6) In view of the Principle laid down in Sunita Kumari Kashyap Vs. State of Bihar and another, AIR 2011 Supreme Court 1674, the case could have been tried by anyone of the courts having jurisdiction over the local areas, where the part of cause of action has arisen.
7) Therefore, by exercising powers under sub- Section (2) of Section 407 of Cr.P.C., in the interest of justice, and for the reasons as discussed above, Sessions Trial No. 311 of 2010, State Vs. Narpal Singh and another, relating to offences punishable under Section 498A/ 376 I.P.C. and one punishable under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station-Kichha is hereby transferred from the court of Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, to the Court of Sessions Judge, Nainital, for further trial. The record of the case shall be transmitted accordingly by the learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, to the Sessions Judge, Nainital. Whereafter, learned Sessions Judge, Nainital, shall proceed further with the trial in accordance with law.
The reference stands answered. Record be sent back.
(Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 15.03.2012 JM