ANSAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall also govern the disposal of M.Cr.C.No.3475/08, as in both the petitions point involved is one and the same. In the petition it is prayed that the criminal case No.1 534/08 registered at Crime No. 120/08 at PS Pithampur pending before CJM, Dhar be transferred to some other district. While in M.Cr.C.3475/08 the same prayer is made for transfer of Criminal Case. In M.Cr.C.No.3795/08 there are 10 accused, while in M.Cr.C.No.3475/08 there are three accused. Apart from this in M.Cr.C.No.3475/08 counsel for the petitioners is also the petitioner.

(2.) In M.Cr.C.No.3795/08 it is alleged that the petitioners are being prosecuted for an offence punishable U/s122, 124(A), 153(A) IPC, U/s3 & 13 of illegal Activities Act and U/s 25 & 27 of Arms Act and the criminal case is pending at Dhar. It is alleged in the petition that petitioners were represented through Shri Noor Mohammed, advocate from Ujjain, who appeared before the learned CJM on 11/04/08 wherein he was ill treated, beaten and threatened by some of the members of respondent No.2 and 3 who gathered in the Court compound. It is alleged that petitioners have also filed an application challenging the territorial jurisdiction of learned CJM which has yet to be decide. It was alleged that petitioners will not get fair justice at Dhar because Bar Association of Dhar has resolved that no members of Bar Association, Dhar shall appear on behalf of the petitioners. It was prayed that in the interest of justice it is necessary that criminal case pending before CJM. Dhar be transferred.

(3.) Prior to this one more petition was filed which is numbered as M.Cr.C.3475/08 wherein it was alleged that petitioners of M.Cr.C.No.3475/08 engaged petitioner No.4 as counsel. It was alleged that petitioner No. 4 went to the Court by Taxi on 11/04/08 and moved two applications. In the application it was alleged that police protection be provided to the petitioner No.4. In the petition it is alleged that petitioner No. 4 who is an advocate was standing in the compound of the court on 11/04/08, at that time the Journalist of Electronic Media came there started to talk about the case with the petitioner No.4. It was alleged that petitioner No. 4 took a press conference one day before i.e. 07/04/08 and in that press conference narrated the complete facts about the case. It is submitted that the journalist who were present in the Court compound asked the note of the press conference which was taken by the petitioner No.4 on 07/04/08. It was alleged that when the petitioner No.4 was standing near to the door of the Court at that time petitioner No 4 was threatened by 15-20 lawyers of Bar Association, Dhar, who told the petitioner No. 4 not to appear on behalf of the accused persons of the case. It was alleged that petitioner No.4 was threatened for dire consequences. It is alleged that 15-20 persons of Hinduism Organization appeared out side the Court and warned that no advocate shall appear on behalf of the accused person in the Court. It was alleged that petitioner No. 4 was beaten by kicks and fists. It was alleged that the members of Bar Association created an atmosphere in which it was practically not possible, to the petitioner No.4 to defend the petitioners. It is alleged that at about 5:00PM the accused persons were brought before the Court under police custody. It was alleged that members of Hindu Organization crated nuisance and under the police protection petitioner No.4 was brought out of the Court. It was alleged that while returning to Indore under Police protection, the vehicle in which the petitioner No.4 was travelling was stopped at PS. Betma and Police Officers asked the petitioner No. 4 to remove black coat, which the petitioner No.4 was wearing. It was alleged that petitioner No.4 told that the law and order situation is not under control and if the petitioner No.4 remains in black coat, than he will be in trouble. It is submitted that an application was taken by the police officers forecibly wherein petitioner No.4 was asked to write down that petitioner No.4 does riot want to take any action for the incident which took place at Dhar. It was alleged that on 25/04/08 petitioner No. 4 made a complaint to all the Higher Authorities at Bhopal, Indore, Ujjain and Dhar about the incident.lt was alleged that since the case was adjourned for 09/05/08, therefore, the petitioner No.4 requested to all the authorities to provide police protection, but no protection was provided to the petitioner No.4. It was alleged that Dhar is a place which is highly sensational and communal rights takes place every now and then. It was alleged that the persons who has ill treated the petitioner No.4 are non-else but the members of organizations which is in power in the State. With all these allegations it was prayed that the criminal case pending at Dhar be transferred.