Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hardeep Singh And Anr vs Rupinder Kaur And Anr on 28 August, 2014
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
222
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.6191 of 2013 (O&M)
Hardeep Singh and another
...Petitioners
Versus
Rupinder Kaur and another
...Respondents
CR No.6192 of 2013 (O&M)
Gurlal Singh and others
...Petitioners
Versus
Dr.Kirpal Singh Sandhu and others
...Respondents
CR No.6193 of 2013 (O&M)
Gurlal Singh and another
...Petitioners
Versus
Kirpal Singh Sandhu and others
...Respondents
Date of decision: August 28, 2014
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.Ranjit Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.Vikram K. Chaudhary, Advocate
for the respondents.
****
INDERJIT SINGH, J.
This order shall dispose of above-stated three revision petitions, the same being connected cases.
VINEET GULATI2014.09.03 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.6191 of 2013 -2-
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
From the record, I find that learned District Judge, Amritsar has transferred all these cases mainly on the ground that admittedly a case FIR No.97 dated 17.11.2010 for offences under Sections 307, 325 and 323 IPC was registered against some of the respondents for causing injuries to Rupinder Kaur Sandhu, for which they are stated to be facing trial in the Court at Patti. The applicants are stated to be old aged Non-resident Indians and their apprehension is that if they will visit Tarn Taran in connection with their cases, they may be physically harmed by respondents. Learned District Judge, Amritsar vide order dated 25.04.2013, taking the above reason as a ground for transfer of these cases, accepted the application. No illegality has been committed in the impugned order. The order passed by learned District Judge is with reasoning and as already FIR under Section 307 IPC etc. is pending against some of the respondents at Patti, therefore, apprehension of the applicants, who are old aged persons, is genuine.
In view of the above discussion, I find that the impugned order dated 25.04.2013 passed by learned District Judge, Amritsar, is correct and as per law and the same is upheld.
Resultantly, finding no merit in all the above-mentioned three revision petitions, the same are dismissed.
August 28, 2014 (INDERJIT SINGH)
Vgulati JUDGE
VINEET GULATI
2014.09.03 14:34
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh