SUNITA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This transfer application has been filed by the petitioners for seeking transfer of criminal case No. 1882 of 2009, Jainarayan Meena v. Ashok & Ors. pending before the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate Banswara, District Banswara to the Court of Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Jhunjhunu.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners that the complainant, Jainarayan Meena has lodged a criminal complaint against the petitioners for offences under Sections 498, 459, 452, 325, 147, 149 and 379 IPC. According to the complainant, on 19.08.2007, the petitioners trespassed into his house and allegedly assaulted the complainant and his family members. He further alleged that the petitioners have taken away cash and jewellery with them. He further alleged that his wife, Prasanna Devi, was taken away by the petitioners, who happened to be the relatives of his wife, Prasanna Devi. Vide order dated 24.01.2008, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance against the accused petitioners, excluding petitioner No.1. The complainant-respondent filed a revision petition before the Sessions Court, Banswara. Vide order dated 24.09.2009, the learned Judge set aside the order and directing that the cognizance be taken against Sunita, petitioner No.1, as well. Consequently, vide order dated 09.07.2010, the Additional Judicial Magistrate, First Class took cognizance against Sunita as well. The said case is pending at Banswara. According to the petitioners, the said criminal case has been lodged by the complainant in order to save his skin against the case filed by his wife, Prasanna Devi, for offences under Section 498A, 406 and 323 which is pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners has pleaded that Section 407 Cr.P.C., empowers the High Court to transfer a case from one Court to other, if such a transfer would be convenient for the parties and for the witnesses. In order to buttress his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon the case of Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr., 2002 AIR(SC) 396 Secondly, in case the petitioners were to attend Court at Banswara, there is likelihood of hostile atmosphere being created against them. According to the learned counsel, the complainant who has assaulted his wife, Prasanna Devi, could easily assault the petitioners as well. Therefore, according to him, it would be inconvenient for the petitioners to attend the Courts at Banswara.