BASHISHT SINGH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Heard Sri Ashok Khare, senior advocate appearing for the petitioner, learned standing counsel has appeared for the respondents, Sri B. N. Singh for respondent No. 2 and Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, senior advocate for the respondent No. 5.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the transfer order on the ground that the said transfer order has been passed at the instance of respondent No. 4 due to the fact that the petitioner arrested the brother of the respondent No. 4 on 3rd of April, 2007, in Case Crime No. 36 of 2006 registered against him. He submits that the fact that on the same day arrest was made and transfer order was issued clearly indicates that the transfer order was at the instance of respondent No. 4. Learned standing counsel filed an affidavit bringing on record the facts and circumstances under which the transfer order dated 3rd of April, 2007, was passed. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the State, a letter dated 29.3.2007 of the Deputy Superintendent of Police has been brought on record in which recommendation was sent for transfer of the petitioner alongwith other persons. The District Magistrate as well as the Senior Superintendent of Police vide their letter dated 31.3.2007, wrote to the Chief Election Officer, Allahabad seeking permission for transfer. The letter dated 3.4.2007 of the Additional Chief Election Officer has been brought on record by which the proposal for transfer was approved.

(3.) LEARNED standing counsel appearing for the respondents supported the transfer order and contended that no error has been committed in transferring the petitioner. He submits that the reports were received from the Local Intelligence Unit that unless the petitioner is transferred, free and fair assembly election are not possible. He submits that prior approval of the Chief Election Officer has been obtained which is required in accordance with the instructions of the Election Commission of India. Sri B. N. Singh appearing for the respondent No. 5 contended that the permission has been granted for transfer of the petitioner by the respondent No. 2 under the instructions issued by the Election Commission of India. He submits that the transfer of large number of police personnel were made on the basis of instructions issued by the Election Commission of India which transfer was challenged by several police personnel in Writ Petition No. 4142 of 2007 which has been dismissed by a learned single Judge vide judgment dated 1.2.2007, against which Special Appeal No. 171 of 2007 has been filed which, too, was dismissed on 12.2.2007.