BHANWAR LAL MISHRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD . By way of the instant transfer petition filed under Section 407, Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner who is the father of the deceased Smt. Rajkumari has sought transfer of proceedings pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Siker for offences punishable under Sections 304 -B and 498 -A, Indian Penal Code to the equivalent Court of competent jurisdiction at Jodhpur on the ground inter alia that from the very beginning, the non -petitioners No. 2 to 4 had indulged in cruel behaviour towards his late daughter Smt. Rajkumari. The allegations are regarding unreasonable dowry demand made by them. In para 13 of the petitioner, it has been contended as under :

(2.) IN order to verify the veracity of the aforesaid contentions as advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, it is eminently necessary in the interest of justice that the petitioner should first spell out reasons as to why he wishes to get the proceedings transferred and withdrawn from the Trial Court at Siker where challan has already been filed by the prosecution and further proceedings in the matter of recording of evidence of prosecution witnesses is in progress. No evidence has been produced by the complainant - petitioner with regard to threats conveyed to the petitioner by way of FIRs. registered against the concerned witnesses who have extended such threats to the petitioner or any of his family members. The statement made in para 13 of the petition that 'the accused are trying to influence the police, bar and witnesses etc. at Siker' is not substantiated by any cogent and satisfactory evidence. It has further not been contended by the complainant as to what are those reasons for which he wants transfer of proceedings from the Trial Court at Siker to the equivalent and Competent Court at Jodhpur where he is residing.

(3.) BEFORE any order of transfer can be passed, the Court also has to satisfy that apart from the aforesaid requirement, the witnesses who are likely to be examined by the prosecution in support of its case, no inconvenience or prejudice should be caused to them. It has not been made clear by the complainant as to how many witnesses are required to be examined by the prosecution in the instant case nor it has been stated as to how many witnesses are to be examined by the complainant in support of his defence. No allegation has been made against the Trial Court with regard to the fact is to why fair and impartial trial is not possible before the concerned Trial Court at Siker nor it has been made known as to what are those exceptional circumstances for which proceedings should be withdrawn from the Trial Court at Siker and be transferred to the equivalent and Competent Court at Jodhpur. The law is well settled that proceedings should not be withdrawn at the whims and wishes of the party and before any order is passed of transfer whether any justifiable cause has been made out for it. The transfer petition in my view fails to meet the aforesaid requirement and is devoid of any merit. Hence, the same is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.