Full Text
#5 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 30.11.2015
JOGINIDER SINGH & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr Colin Gonsalaves, Sr. Advocate Mr H.S.Phoolka, Sr. Advocate with
Ms Kamna Vohra, Mr Jagjit Singh Chhabbra, Mr Divyajyoti, Mr Gurbaksh Singh and Ms Shilpa
Dewan, Advocates for Petitioners.
Mr Avtar Singh and Mr Lakhmi Chand, Advocates with Mr J.S. Jolly for Petitioner No.3/DSSMC.
Through: Mr D.P.Singh, Ms Tarannum Cheema, Mr Raj Kiran Vats and Ms Hiral
Gupta, Advocates for CBI.
Mr Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate for R-2 & R-3.
2015:DHC:9756-DB
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. The present is a petition under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘the Code’) essentially praying for transfer of Sessions Case No.27/2010 titled CBI v. Sajjan Kumar and Ors. pending before District and Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, to some other competent court having jurisdiction.
2. At the outset, counsel appearing on behalf of the transfer petitioners as well as counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents state that they withdraw any and all allegations made against the District and Sessions Judge before whom the subject matter is pending as well as any allegations made against counsel appearing on behalf of the parties before the Sessions Court as well as before this court, unconditionally. Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties state that the pleadings in this behalf may be expunged. Ordered accordingly.
3. The present case relates to the unfortunate incidents that occurred in the aftermath of the assassination of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India. The case is yet to attain closure.
4. The provisions of Section 407 of the Code read as follows:
5. A plain reading of the above provision reveals that it stipulates that the High Court may transfer any case under this provision if it considers it expedient so to do to meet the ends of justice. The provision further stipulates that any case can be transferred from a criminal court subordinate to the High Court to any other criminal court of equal or superior jurisdiction.
6. In the present case it is observed that all the allegations levelled against the concerned judicial officer have been unconditionally withdrawn by the petitioners. This withdrawal is emphasized and underlined.
7. It is one of the cardinal principles of administration of justice that “Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done.”
8. After having heard counsel for the parties, it is my considered opinion that in view of the dictum afore-stated it would be necessary and expedient to transfer the subject case in the interest of justice, in view of the avoidable controversy that has been unnecessarily generated and list it before another criminal court of equal jurisdiction. It is made clear that the transfer of this case from the court of District and Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, is warranted in order to protect and uphold the dignity and majesty of the judicial system and to ensure the faith of citizens in courts of law. The direction proposed to be issued is with a view to render the judicial officer immune from controversy and to protect his impeccable reputation. It is, therefore, reiterated that the present order is not a comment on the conduct of the judicial officer hearing the present case save and except to reaffirm the faith that the public reposes in that judicial officer.
9. In view of the foregoing, with the consent of the parties and after recording their no objection in this behalf, the Sessions Case No.27/2010 titled CBI v. Sajjan Kumar and Ors pending before District and Sessions Judge, Karkardoom Courts, Delhi is transferred to the court of District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, forthwith. The District and Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, is directed to transmit the papers and proceedings of the subject case to the court of District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House, forthwith.
10. With the consent of the parties appearing before this court the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House is requested to video-graph the entire proceedings in the subject trial to be conducted before it. Counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents undertakes to cover the entire costs of the said video recording. The offer is accepted and the private respondents are directed to file an undertaking in this behalf before the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House, on the next date of hearing.
11. The parties and their counsel are directed to appear before the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House, in the first instance on 08.12.2015 for further proceedings in accordance with law.
12. It is made clear that the above order has been occasioned in the interest of justice and with the consent of parties appearing before this court.
13. A copy of this order be transmitted to the District and Sessions Judge Karkardooma Courts, Delhi as well as to the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, by Express Messenger today.
14. With the above directions the present petition is disposed of.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J NOVEMBER 30, 2015 mk