Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2003 DIGILAW 291 (SC)

Parveen Bhatia v. State of Punjab

2003-02-24

H.K.SEMA, Y.K.SABHARWAL

body2003
ORDER : TP(Cr.) 48/2003. By this petition transfer of case arising out of FIR No.303 dated 13th November, 2001 from Police Station Kotwali Jhansi pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi (UP) to a court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana has been sought. The petitioner No. 1 was an agent of respondent No. 3/Company. There were dispute between the petitioner and his family members on one hand and the Company-respondent No. 3, on the other hand. According to company, the petitioner embezelled huge amounts as stated in the FIR and committed offences under Sections 409, 468, 471 Indian Penal Code. According to the petitioner, he was assaulted by the officers of the Company at Ludhiana. Certain cases as detailed in para I I of the petition are pending in courts at Ludhiana, according to the petitioners. There are certain proceedings that are also pending in civil court reference of which has been made in the said paragraph. Details of three FIRs have also been given. The said FIRs are - FIR No. 276/2001 dated 10.10.2001, FIR No.29/2001 dated 7.12.2001 and FIR No. 15/2002 dated 23.1.2002. These FIRs are pending at investigation stage in Ludhiana. 2. On a petition (Crl.M.No. 823/2002) filed by Parveen Bhatia & his family members before High Court of Punjab & Haryana, the High Court by order dated 29th May, 2002 directed that the proceedings in FIR No. 303 dated 13.11.2001 shall stand transferred to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana for decision in accordance with law. That order is under challenge in SLP (Cr) No. 3391/2002 filed by the Company. One of the grounds urged in the SLP is that the High Court could not transfer the case pending before a court subordinate to the court of another High Court to be tried by the court subordinate to the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. It seems that with a view to meet this objection the present-transfer petition has been filed seeking order of transfer from this Court as noticed hereinbefore. 3. We have heard Mr. Hardev Singh and Mr. Jaspal Singh learned senior counsel for the parties. 4. It seems that with a view to meet this objection the present-transfer petition has been filed seeking order of transfer from this Court as noticed hereinbefore. 3. We have heard Mr. Hardev Singh and Mr. Jaspal Singh learned senior counsel for the parties. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting on facts, lest it may prejudice the parties, we are of the view that it is expedient to secure the ends of justice to transfer the case arising out of FIR No.303 dated 13.1 1.2001, where the challan is said to have been filed, from the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi (UP) to a court at Chandigarh, we order accordingly. The learned Sessions Judge, Chandigarh will entrust the case on transfer to a competent court at Chandigarh. We further direct that cases arising out of FIRs Nos. 276/2001, 29/2001 and 15/2002 (in case the challan is filed) shall also be tried by the same court to which the case transferred from Jhansi is entrusted. 5. The S.L.P. and the Transfer Petition are disposed of in above terms. Orders accordingly.