Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 312 (RAJ)

Chanchal Kanwar v. State of Rajasthan

2016-02-23

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2016
ORDER : Sandeep Mehta, J. Heard. 2. By way of the instant transfer petition, the petitioner complainant has approached this Court seeking transfer of the Criminal Case No.16/2013 titled as State v. Sushil Kadwasra from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 4, Jodhpur to any other Court in the District. 3. The petitioner is the complainant of the case. She has sought transfer of the above case with the allegation that the Presiding Officer of the Court is not proceeding with the case fairly and is prejudiced against her. She moved an application under Section 408 Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur which was rejected by order dated 27.1.2016 and hence, this transfer petition. The petitioner has alleged that right from the beginning of the trial, the Presiding Officer of the Court is acting in a prejudicial fashion and she does not expect justice from the said Court. 4. Arguing the matter in person, she attributed wild and scurrilous allegations against the learned Presiding Officer of the trial Court. This Court put a pertinent query to the petitioner as to whether she was desirous of imp leading the Presiding Officer as a party to the proceedings so that comments could be sought but she chose not to do so. It may be noted here that the petitioner has already made two unsuccessful attempts for getting the case transferred from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.4, Jodhpur. Initially she filed S.B. Criminal Misc. Transfer Petition No.7/2015 at Jaipur Bench of this Court. The said petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 31.8.2015 giving her liberty to file a fresh petition before the appropriate Court. Thereafter, she moved another transfer petition before this Court being S.B. Criminal Misc. Transfer Petition No.12/2015 which was rejected by this Court on 1.10.2015 observing that the reasons set out in the transfer petition and the law of jurisdiction did not entitle the petitioner to have the case transferred. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the application under Section 408 Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur which was rejected as mentioned above. 5. Having considered the arguments of the petitioner, this Court is of a firm view that the prayer made by the petitioner for transferring the case is totally unjustified and baseless. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the application under Section 408 Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur which was rejected as mentioned above. 5. Having considered the arguments of the petitioner, this Court is of a firm view that the prayer made by the petitioner for transferring the case is totally unjustified and baseless. Firstly, she attempted to get the case transferred to Jaipur and on failing to achieve her objective, she filed another transfer petition no.12/2015 before this Court wherein also, the request was made to transfer the case to Jaipur. In neither of the transfer petitions, did the petitioner attribute any such allegation to the Presiding Officer which she has levelled in the pleadings of the present transfer petition. While arguing the matter before this Court, wild and scurrilous allegations have been levelled against the Presiding Officer. The allegations are totally baseless. Neither the Presiding Officer was impleaded as party in the transfer petition before the Sessions Court nor before this Court and thus, there was no occasion to summon the comments of the Presiding Officer so as to test the veracity of the petitioner's allegations. The trial Court is presided over by a Lady Judicial Officer carrying impeccable reputation and thus, the allegations levelled by the petitioner that the Presiding Officer is prejudiced against her and is harassing and humiliating her are ex-facie unworthy of credence. It appears that the petitioner, by any means and by hook or crook is desirous of delaying the trial and wants to keep the matter lingered on. The Presiding Officer appears not to be bowing down to the undue pressure exerted by the petitioner for delaying the trial and that is why, the transfer is sought. In the backdrop of these facts, this Court is of the opinion that no case is made out for directing transfer of Criminal Case No.16/2013 titled as State v. Sushil Kadwasra from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.4, Jodhpur to any other Court in the District. 6. Accordingly, the instant transfer petition being devoid of any merit is hereby rejected. 7. Stay petition also stands rejected.