Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

ANITA CHAUDHRY, J(ORAL) The petitioner is seeking transfer of the petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., pending before the Family Court at Sonepat.

The petitioner is a practising lawyer at Delhi. His wife has filed a petition seeking maintenance. He seeks transfer on the ground that he was threatened by the lawyers representing the wife when he went to attend the Court hearing in the FIR case. He was threatened by lawyer representing the wife and he was afraid of attending the Courts at Sonepat and the respondents were also creating pressure upon the Court. The petitioner had pleaded that he was practising at Delhi. He had pleaded that he had aged parents and his father was bed ridden and no good lawyer would represent him before the Courts at Sonepat on account of the influence exercised by the wife and her family. The petitioner had further pleaded that the uncle of the respondent was influential and the complainant had his support. The petitioner had also pleaded that he had filed a transfer petition before the Supreme Court and ex parte interim order was passed in his favour but later it was dismissed on 13.12.2013 but liberty was granted to approach the High Court. The petitioner had referred to a number of authorities in his petition which need not detain us here.

The parties were called for re-concilation. The talks had failed. The petitioner no.1 had stated that he was not ready to pay additional amount to the complainant in case of travel.

The petitioner is seeking transfer of the case from Sonepat to any other district in Haryana and prefers it to be Faridabad or Gurgaon. The petitioner is staying in Faridabad and he practices at Delhi. The wife lives in Sonepat with her parents. The grounds on which transfer is sought are:-

1) The lawyers representing the complainant had threatened him on 27.02.2013,
2) He was practising in Delhi, therefore, it was not possible for him to come to Sonepat,
3) His parents are old,
4) He was not able to get a good lawyer because of the influence of the complainant and her uncle,
5) The release of his sister on bail was delayed,

The seminal issue is whether the case should be transferred to some other district. The petition has been filed at Sonepat. The wife is residing at Sonepat. No threat was given by the wife or her uncle. The petitioner has alleged that he was threatened by the lawyer representing the wife.

The petitioner has not approached the police with any complaint. No allegations have been levelled against the Presiding Officer. The petitioner merely apprehends that he would not get a fair and just trial. The apprehensions do not appear to be genuine. So far as apprehension is concerned, it has to be established that justice would not be done. It would be profitable to refer to a passage from Gurcharan Dass Chadha Vs. State of Rajasthan AIR 1966 SC 1418, wherein it has been held:-