LAWS(DLH)-2006-7-169

S J CHAUDHRI Vs. STATE OF DELHI

Decided On July 24, 2006
S.J.CHAUDHRI Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Section 407 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner seeks transfer of case bearing RC No.3/83 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, popularly known as 'Sikand Murder Case' from the court of Ms.Mamta Sehgal, Additional Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari, Delhi to the court of Sh.S.P. Garg, Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.

(2.) Shorn of details the facts are as follows. The petitioner Lt.Col.S.J. Chaudhri is the main accused in the "Sikand Murder Case", who is alleged to have murdered one Mr.Krishan Sikand on 2.10.82 in his flat at 98, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi by way of a parcel bomb resulting in the registration of a case against him under Section 302 IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act bearing case No.RC-3/83. The said case was pending in the court of Ms.Mamta Sehgal, Additional Sessions Judge posted at Patiala House Courts, New Delhi and remained pending in her court till the issuance of posting/transfer orders passed by the High Court on 3rd January, 2006 whereby and whereunder Ms.Mamta Sehgal was transferred from Patiala House Courts to Tis Hazari Courts as Land Acquisition Court, apart from being Special Court for the trial of the "Uphar Tragedy Case". Consequent to her transfer and the posting of Sh.S.P. Garg, Additional Sessions Judge in Patiala House Courts in her place, the "Sikand Murder Case" along with other criminal cases was placed under the charge of Sh.S.P. Garg, Additional Sessions Judge. Thereupon, a mercy petition was filed by the unfortunate father of the deceased Krishan Sikand that the case be not transferred to a new court as Smt.Mamta Sehgal had not only recorded the evidence of the prosecution as well as of the defence, but the prosecution had already concluded its arguments and the defence had also advanced substantial arguments. The petitioner pointed out that he was 94 years of age and had been vigorously pursuing the case for the last 25 years in a quest for justice, and prayed the case be re-transferred to the court of Smt.Mamta Sehgal, where it was reaching its logical conclusion.

(3.) A note was put up by the Joint Registrar (Gazette) on the above mercy petition on 16.1.2006, which was approved by the then Chief Justice (Hon'ble Mr.Justice Markandeya Katju), which reads as follows:-