BHUSHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF J & K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of instant petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks transfer of Criminal Case (Challan No.39 of 2017) under Sec. 279/304-II RPC, pending trial in the court of Sessions Judge Samba, to any other court of competent jurisdiction at Jammu.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was driving a car rashly and negligently on 23/7/2017 with the result he lost control of the same leading to an accident with a motorcycle at Swankha and injury to the rider thereof ending up in his death later; FIR was registered, and after investigation challan No.39 of 2017 put up against the petitioner, which is now pending disposal in the Court of Sessions Judge Samba. Initially the case was registered under Sec. 279/337 of the Ranbir Penal Code, and later upon the death of the injured, made into Sec. 304-A RPC and subsequently upon completion of the investigation into Ss. 279/304-II of the Code. It has been further stated that the petitioner is an Advocate by profession, with the seat of practice at Samba. It is very embarrassing for him that he would be appearing as accused in the Court where he has been and is conducting cases of his clients. If the case is tried in the Court at Samba, he would be faced with sagging spirits, psychological pressure and diffidence and that would adversely affect his defense in the case. Unfortunately, by reason of the injured being local, the atmosphere at Samba is charged and, thus, not congenial to the fairness of trial at that place. In fact, the petitioner is vulnerable at that place, and his safety and security is not assured there; he apprehends danger to his life, if the trial is held at Samba. It is further stated that the Bar at Samba is divided on the lines of the local sentiments adding to the discomfiture to the petitioner and aggravated pressure on his psyche adversely affecting him in his defence. On each day of hearing, a large number of locals gather in the premises and the professional rivals exploit the situation. The petitioner has a serious apprehension that his case would be seriously prejudiced and justice will suffer; justice may be done but will not appear to be done. In the circumstances, transfer of the said case as prayed for is well deserved, as it would advance the cause of justice. Out of 19 witnesses cited on behalf of the prosecution, 5 are police personnel, 5 from Jammu, one of them being Registrar Government Medical College, Jammu, and two from R.S. Pura, 3 from Sangwali Mandi Samba, 1 from Ward No.7 Samba, 2 from Gho-Manhasan and one each from Gho-Brahmna and Jerda Ramgarh. One of the witnesses is Patwari, who was at the relevant time posted as Patwari Patwar Halqa Gho-Brahmna. Of the aforesaid witnesses, four are alleged to be eye witnesses, out of whom 2 are from Jammu (Kothi Kour R.S.Pura and Ward No.10 R.S. Pura) one from Gho-Manhasan and the other from Ward No.7 Samba, and the rest are just formal witnesses. From the aforesaid complexion of the proposed evidence, it is apparent that even on the principle of convenience, the case deserves to be transferred to Jammu; a good number of witnesses, including a couple of eye witnesses, are from Jammu, and it is convenient for other witnesses as well to appear at Jammu for evidence. The transfer of the case would not involve any prejudice to the prosecution, or undue advantage to the petitioner.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the file.