Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 911 (ALL)

NIZAM QURESHI v. STATE OF U. P.

2019-04-11

NAHEED ARA MOONIS

body2019
JUDGMENT : Naheed Ara Moonis, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and also perused the material placed on record. 2. The instant transfer application has been filed with a prayer to transfer the Case No.308 of 2015, Smt. Shama Begum Vs. Nizam Quresi, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Jaswant Nagar, District Etawah pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Etawah to any other adjoining district. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is facing threat to his life from the opposite party no.2 and his family members and as such it is in the interest of justice to transfer the aforesaid case pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Etawah to the adjoining district. 4. The ground seeking transfer of the aforesaid case is that the brother of the opposite party no.2 along with his associates had abused and tried to kill the applicant when he had gone on the date fixed before the court below in the aforesaid case. While he along with his family members was returning from the court below and going towards station road, the brothers of the opposite party no.2 had stopped them and started abusing. When the applicant and his family members tried to restrain them, the brother of the opposite party no.2 whipped out a knife and tried to kill them and had extended threat that if they come at Etawah, they would be killed. Thereafter somehow, the applicant and his family fled away from the place. 5. It is further submitted that as the applicant has threat to his life in pursuing the case at district Etawah, his life and liberty is under peril and jeopardy hence the case pending before the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Etawah under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is necessary to be transferred to any other adjoining district. 6. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material placed on record. 7. Admittedly, the opposite party no.2 is the wife of the applicant. The opposite party no.2 has lodged an FIR against the applicant and others on 15.9.2015 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act in which after submission of charge sheet cognizance has been taken on 8.1.2016. 7. Admittedly, the opposite party no.2 is the wife of the applicant. The opposite party no.2 has lodged an FIR against the applicant and others on 15.9.2015 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act in which after submission of charge sheet cognizance has been taken on 8.1.2016. A complaint under the Domestic Violence Act filed by the opposite party no.2 on 19.10.2015 against the applicant and his family members is pending before the court of ACJM, Etawah. The dates are being successively fixed in the case for recording of evidence. Both the parties have also appeared on each of the dates before the court below. Now dilatory tactics has been adopted by the applicant to unnecessarily drag the proceeding which are pending since 2015 before different courts in the judgeship of Etawah. 8. In such circumstances, the opposite party no.2 cannot be said to have extended any kind of threat. As the application u/S 125 Cr.P.C. moved on her behalf is still pending since 2015, this Court does not find any cogent reason to transfer the case from the court of district Etawah to any other adjoining district on the ground that the applicant is being threatened by the opposite party no.2 or her family members when all methods for blocking the progress of cases failed to fructify the applicant has taken recourse by moving the transfer application before the court. The conduct of the applicant has been reprehensible. The only purpose to delay the proceeding in the case. 9. In the light of above, the application lacks any merit and is accordingly dismissed. 10. As the matter is pending since long i.e. since 2015, the court below is directed to proceed to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously on its own merit and make its earnest endeavour to conclude the proceeding without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.