Allowed

Rohini Jain and Others v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC16 May 2013CRM-M/13873/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 407 Cr.P.C. allowed for transfer of FIR No. 120 from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot to District Moga. The Court held no prejudice to prosecution and considered convenience of parties with Moga now a separate Sessions Division.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 120 pending in Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Faridkot transferred to District Moga; case file sent to C.J.M. Moga with direction to fix date of appearance.

Rohini Jain and Others Vs State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

CRM No. M-13873 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No. M-13873 of 2013 Date of decision: 16.05.2013

¶5

Rohini Jain & Others

..Petitioners

Vs.

State of Punjab

..Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

¶11

Present: Mr. P.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. A.S. Jattana, Addl. AG, Punjab.

¶13

¶14

M.M.S. BEDI, J.(ORAL)

¶15

This is a petition under Section 407 Cr.P.C., for transfer of case FIR No. 120, dated 26.08.2007 registered under Section 2(i), 3, 5, 21 and 36 of Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995 at Police Station Mehna, District Moga pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Faridkot to any Court in District Moga.

¶16

The FIR was originally registered at Police Station Mehna, District Moga and the challan was also presented in the Court of competent jurisdiction at Moga by the prosecution agency.

¶17

It is averred in the petition that on account of the political scenario at that time, no senior counsel was ready to contest the case of the petitioners as such on their request the District & Sessions Judge, Faridkot had transferred the case from the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Moga to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot vide order dated

¶18

CRM No. M-13873 of 2013 2

¶19

20.03.2010. It is claimed that the prosecution agency has already concluded its evidence and the case is fixed for defence evidence. On account of change of circumstances, the petitioners are now able to engage senior counsel to contest the case in District Moga.

¶20

On the instructions of ASI Jagjit Singh from Police Station Mehna, District Moga, Mr. A.S. Jattana, Addl. AG, Punjab, submits that since the evidence of the prosecution stands concluded, it will not be inconvenient for the prosecution to proceed with the said case at Moga. Rather, it would be convenient for the prosecution agency to effectively prosecute the petitioners at Moga.

¶21

It is not out of place to observe here that the earlier order of transfer was passed by District and Sessions Judge, Faridkot as Moga formed part of Session Division, Faridkot. Since Moga has now been made a separate Sessions Division in 2012, Sessions Judge, Faridkot seems to have lost jurisdiction to transfer the matter back from Faridkot to Moga.

¶22

Petitioners No. 1 and 3 are ladies. They claim difficulty and harassment in facing trial at Faridkot.

¶23

Taking into consideration the abovesaid circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that since no prejudice will be caused to the prosecution agency in case the trial is transferred from the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Faridkot to a Court of competent jurisdiction in Sessions Division Moga.

¶24

Petition is allowed. The case FIR No. 120, dated 26.08.2007 registered under Section 2(i), 3, 5, 21 and 36 of Punjab Apartment and

¶25

CRM No. M-13873 of 2013 3

¶26

Property Regulation Act, 1995 at Police Station Mehna, District Moga, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot is transferred to District Moga. The case file complete in all respects, will be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moga directing the parties to appear there on a specific date. It will be open to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moga to retain the case with him or entrust the same to any other Court of competent jurisdiction.

¶27

The order be communicated to all the concerned quarters.

¶28

(M.M.S. BEDI) JUDGE

¶29

16.05.2013 Poonam (II)

Rohini Jain and Others v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohini Jain and Others v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahabir Jangir and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surat Singh Vs Priti Rani

Ajay Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Deepak Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Amit Salvi Vs State of Punjab