TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (5) TMI 865
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, Court of Sessions at Thane, Maharashtra on the ground of convenience of the parties and the witnesses cited in the charge sheet by the prosecution. 2. Petitioners are husband and wife. While Petitioner No. 2 husband is currently posted as Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax at Vapi, Gujarat, Petitioner No. 1 wife is practicing as a Chartered Accountant in the State of Maharashtra. Both the Petitioners are facing prosecution in Criminal Case No. 45 of 2008 for offences punishable under Sections 13(1) (e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 109 Indian Penal Code. The said case was registered on 14th July, 2005 against the Petitioner-husband on the basis of recovery of cash and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tnesses cited at serial Nos. 62, 68, 91 and 92 of the charge-sheet are from Delhi. Two of the said four witnesses are said to be no longer in Delhi. The Petitioners allege that they have been regularly attending the Court in Delhi ever since the charge-sheet was filed but not much progress has been made towards the conclusion of the trial so far. Petitioner No. 1, who happens to be a practising Chartered Accountant in Thane, has apart from her professional commitments, responsibility towards her mother who is aged 75 years and who stays with her. Appearance of the said Petitioner in Delhi would, therefore, cause inconvenience to her on personal, professional and even the family front. So also Petitioner No. 2 who is currently posted at Guja....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. The source and the plentitude of the power to transfer are not disputed before us by Mr. Rawal, counsel appearing for the Respondent. Even otherwise as observed by this Court in Dr. Subramaniam Swamy v. Ramakrishna Hegde (1990) 1 SCC 4, the question of expediency depends upon the facts of each case, the paramount consideration being the need to meet the ends of justice. 6. The material facts relevant to the determination of the question of expediency are not in dispute inasmuch as the Respondent do not dispute that the chargesheet enlists 92 witnesses, 88 out of whom are from outside Delhi and from different places in Maharashtra. It is also not in dispute that Petitioner No. 1 is a Chartered Accountant practising in Thane, Petitioner N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rules can be prescribed for deciding a transfer petition which has always to be decided on the basis of the facts of each case, convenience of the parties including the witnesses to be produced at the trial is a relevant consideration. This Court observed: 7. The purpose of the criminal trial is to dispense fair and impartial justice uninfluenced by extraneous considerations. When it is shown that public confidence in the fairness of a trial would be seriously undermined, any party can seek the transfer of a case within the State under Section 407 and anywhere in the country under Section 406 Code of Criminal Procedure The apprehension of not getting a fair and impartial inquiry or trial is required to be reasonable and not imaginary, bas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Petitioner from Delhi to Durg. So also in Captain Amarinder Singh v. Prakash Singh Badal (2009) 6 SCC 260, this Court held that an impartial trial and convenience of the parties & witnesses are relevant considerations for deciding a transfer petition. In Jayendra Saraswathy Swamigal v. State of Tamil Nadu (2005) 8 SCC 771, this Court transferred a case from Kanchipuram to Pondicherry having regard to the convenience of the prosecuting agency and the language in which almost all the witnesses had to depose before the Trial Court. 11. In the light of the above decisions and the fact that CBI is fully equipped with an office at Bombay and a Court handling CBI cases is established at Thane also, we see no reason why the transfer of the case wo....