TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 1367
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and will be prejudiced in conducting his defense in the courts at Dehradun. The basic premise for such apprehension is that on account of his work as an investigative journalist against the Ruling dispensation, the State is targeting the Petitioner for vindictive prosecution. It is pointed out that as a journalist the Petitioner has conducted sting operations against the Chief Minister, his relatives and associates in the State of Uttarakhand and therefore he is being targeted for malicious prosecution within the State. Moreover, besides the three cases for which transfer is sought, many false cases are foisted against the Petitioner. As such, the Petitioner has a genuine and justifiable apprehension that justice will not be done if the trials are conducted in the courts within the State of Uttarakhand. Therefore, those cases be transferred either to the courts in Delhi or to any other competent courts, out of Uttarakhand. 3. Representing the State of Uttarakhand, Ms. Ruchira Gupta, the learned Counsel however submits that the Petitioner has failed to demonstrate how and in what manner, he will be prejudiced if the trials continue in the courts at Dehradun. According to her, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing corruption in high places. The sting operations commenced in January 2018, but there was no attempt made by the Petitioner to telecast the video recordings and only then Complainant realized that the video footage collected with secret camera will be used by the Petitioner to blackmail people. That is why on 10.8.2018, the Complainant who was one of the team members under the Accused, was constrained to file the FIR to expose the nefarious design of the Petitioner. The counsel then argues that the Petitioner has failed to indicate as to how the trial would be prejudiced if they are to be conducted in the courts at Dehradun. 6. Mr. Anupam Lal Das, the learned Counsel appearing for the co-Accused in the FIR No. 100/2018, however, joins the Petitioner in seeking transfer of the said criminal case from the Courts in Uttarakhand. 7. Before proceeding any further, it would be appropriate to refer to the list of cases pending against the Petitioner. Out of those cases, 17 cases relate to the State of Uttarakhand, 4 cases are from the State of Uttar Pradesh, 5 cases relate to the State of West Bengal, 2 cases are from Delhi out of which one is under investigation of the CBI, and Anr.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... add that our courts are capable of deciding cases on the merits of the evidence. 13. On the above aspect the following ratio will have a bearing. In Sidhartha Vashisht v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2010) 6 SCC 1, Justice P. Sathasivam, as he then was, while writing for the Division Bench discussed the role of public prosecutor and conducting of investigation and his observations in the present case, will be apposite. 187. Therefore, a Public Prosecutor has wider set of duties than to merely ensure that the Accused is punished, the duties of ensuring fair play in the proceedings, all relevant facts are brought before the court in order for the determination of truth and justice for all the parties including the victims. It must be noted that these duties do not allow the Prosecutor to be lax in any of his duties as against the Accused.... 198. ...The law in relation to investigation of offences and rights of an Accused, in our country, has developed with the passage of time. On the one hand, power is vested in the investigating officer to conduct the investigation freely and transparently. Even the courts do not normally have the right to interfere with the investigation. It exclus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elong to Delhi; but the meat of the matter, in a case of defamation is something different. The main witnesses are those who speak to having read the offending matter and other relevant circumstances flowing therefrom. They belong to Bombay in this case and the suggestion of the Petitioner's counsel that Delhi readers may be substitute witnesses and the complainant may content herself with examining such persons is too presumptuous for serious consideration. 15. In Abdul Nazar Madan v. State of T.N. and Anr. (2000) 6 SCC 204, Justice R.P. Sethi speaking for the Division Bench discussed the scope of power Under Section 406 Code of Criminal Procedure and 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, based upon conjectures and surmis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....witnesses and the convenience of all concerned in the matter. **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** 51. We have already pointed out that a mere allegation that there is an apprehension that justice will not be done in a given case alone does not suffice. Considering the totality of all the circumstances, we are of the opinion that in a secular, democratic Government, governed by the Rule of law, the State of Punjab is responsible for ensuring free, fair and impartial trial to the Accused, notwithstanding the nature of the accusations made against them. In the case on hand, the apprehension entertained by the Petitioners cannot be construed as reasonable one and the case cannot be transferred on a mere allegation that there is apprehension that justice will not be done. 18. Let us now examine another precedent on transfer of criminal cases. In Nahar Singh Yadav and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (2011) 1 SCC 307, Justice D.K. Jain writing for the three Judge Bench discussed the scope of transfer Under Section 406 Code of Criminal Procedure in the following terms: 22. It is, however, the trite law that power Under Section 406 Code of Criminal Procedure has to be construed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is not possible. Equally important is to verify that the apprehension of not getting a level playing field, is based on some credible material and not just conjectures and surmises. 21. While assurance of a fair trial needs to be respected, the plea for transfer of case should not be entertained on mere apprehension of a hyper sensitive person. In his pleadings and arguments, the Petitioner in my assessment has failed to demonstrate that because of what he endured in 2018, it is not possible for the courts in the state to dispense justice objectively and without any bias. It can't also be overlooked that the Petitioner is involved in several cases and this year itself has generated few on his own in the state of Uttarakhand. Therefore, it is difficult to accept that justice for the Petitioner can only be ensured by transfer of three cases mentioned in these petitions. 22. While considering a plea for transfer, the convenience of parties would be a relevant consideration. It can't just be the convenience of the Petitioner but also of the Complainant, the Witnesses, the Prosecution besides the larger issue of trial being conducted under the jurisdictional Court. When relat....