Dismissed

Wasi Haidar v. State of U.P. and 21 Ors.

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2020TACR/43/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected an application to transfer a pending criminal trial from Saharanpur to Ghaziabad. The court found no merit in transferring the case merely due to an old complaint against the D.G.C., noting that fact witness statements had been recorded and some accused summoned.

What did the court decide?

The transfer application was rejected. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

Wasi Haidar Vs State of U.P. and 21 Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 82

¶2

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 43 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Wasi Haidar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 21 Ors. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This transfer application has been moved on behalf of the applicant to transfer the Sessions Trial no. 637 of 2013, Wali Haidar Vs. State of U.P. and others in case crime no. 192 of 2013 under section 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 323, 504, 506, 386 I.P.C. police station Gangoh District Saharanpur from Saharanpur to Ghaziabad.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is informant. He had lodged the first information report in the year 2013. Trial has not been concluded till date due to pressure of D.G.C. office. The applicant had made a complaint against D.G.C. ( Crl) on 23.5.2013 due to which the fair trial is not going on.

¶9

On the other hand learned A.G.A. argued that this is an old case and as per copy of order sheet the statements of four witnesses have been recorded. During trial an application under section 319 Cr.P.C. was also moved on behalf of the prosecution which was allowed and other accused were summoned to face trial. The statements of witnesses of fact have been recorded and other accused were also summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that fair trial is not going on. The alleged complaint is said to be made in the year 2013. Seven years have been passed from the alleged complaint and the proceeding of sessions trial is pending in the court Additional Sessions Judge. Merely on the basis of complaint made against D.G.C. ( Crl) about 7 years ago, it is not just and proper to transfer this case from Saharanpur to another District.

¶10

A perusal of record shows that this is a very old case and the

¶11

same is pending since 2013. As per statement of learned counsel for the applicant, the statements of four witnesses have been recorded including the witnesses of fact. From the record it is also apparent that some accused persons were also summoned on the application under section 319 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of prosecution. The alleged complaint is said to be made about 7 years ago.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I don't find any good ground to transfer the aforementioned case from Saharanpur to other District. The transfer application is totally devoid of merit and is liable to be rejected. It is accordingly rejected.

¶13

However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournment to the parties, if there is no legal impediment.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.2.2020 Gss

Wasi Haidar v. State of U.P. and 21 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wasi Haidar v. State of U.P. and 21 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Abad Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Yatendra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prem Nath Mishra and Anr. Vs State of Up and Anr.

Gulab Bind and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nepal Vs State of U.P.