Allowed

Victim J v. Govt of NCT of Delhi through & Anr.

Delhi HC18 Feb 2025TR.P.(CRL.)/111/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer petition by a prosecutrix seeking transfer of proceedings in an FIR involving offences against her from Karkardooma Courts because the accused was a practising advocate there. The court found a reasonable apprehension and transferred the case to Patiala House Courts.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in FIR No. 660/2021 transferred to concerned Court of District & Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts; pending applications disposed of.

Victim J Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi through & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~28

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- TR.P.(CRL.) 111/2024 & CRL.M.A. 36532/2024 VICTIM J .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. S.K. Srivastava and Ms. Garima Singh, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State. Inspector Somdeep Kumar, P.S. Bhajan Pura. Mr. Jatin Rana, Advocate for R-2.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶8

O R D E R % 18.02.2025

¶9

The Petitioner is the prosecutrix in FIR No. 660/2021 under Section 376, 323 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860¹ , registered at P.S. Bhajan Pura. Subsequently, a chargesheet against Respondent No. 2 has also been filed under Sections 376, 377, 323, 506 and 509 of the IPC as well as Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶10

The proceedings emanating from the aforenoted FIR are pending before the Karkardooma Courts.

¶11

Although the Petitioner has levelled several allegations in the present petition, which are strongly denied by counsel for Respondent No. 2, yet an undisputed fact emerges that Respondent No. 2 is presently a practising

¶12

1 “IPC”

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 18:02:18

¶15

advocate in Karkardooma Court.

¶16

It is a well-established that a party’s apprehension, that they may not be able to properly defend/prosecute their case before an appropriate Court, must be based on reasonable grounds. While the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, establishing such a reasonable apprehension is sine qua non for seeking transfer of a case² . In this regard, while examining the request for transfer, a Court must be mindful of the fact that justice must not only be done but it should appear to be done.

¶17

Therefore, without going into the specific allegations made by the Petitioner, in the opinion of the Court, considering that Respondent No. 2 is an active Advocate in the Karkardooma Courts, the element of reasonable apprehension of the prosecutrix is made out. Thus, in order to rule out any element of biasness, it would be appropriate that the proceedings in FIR No. 660/2021 be adjudicated by a Court of some other district.

¶18

Accordingly, the present transfer petition is allowed and the proceedings in FIR No. 660/2021, stand transferred to the concerned Court of District & Sessions Judge Patiala House Courts.

¶19

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned courts for necessary compliance.

¶20

Pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶21

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶22

FEBRUARY 18, 2025 /as

¶23

2 Afjal Ali Sha v. State of West Bengal & Ors., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 282

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 18:02:18

Victim J v. Govt of NCT of Delhi through & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Victim J v. Govt of NCT of Delhi through & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Govt. of NCT of Delhi Vs Ccl M and N

Sh. Alok Lakhanpal Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Rameshwar Dayal Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Kiran Sharma Vs Raghu Raj Singh

State Vs Unknown

Mehima Nanda & Anr. Vs Amritpal Nanda & Ors.

Rohit Malik Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi& Anr.

Prashant Sharma Vs Ruby Gupta @ Ruby Kumari

Sh Jagmohan Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Chetan Rohila Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Gargi Bajaj & Anr. Vs Pooja Sharma Bajaj

Dr. Atul Gupta & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Ms. Neeru K.S. Vs State & Anr.

Sh Jai Bhagwan and Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.