Delhi High Court
‘X’ (Assumed Name) vs State Of Nct Delhi on 19 April, 2018
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DECIDED ON : 19th APRIL, 2018
+ TR.P.(CRL.) 14/2018, CRL.M.A.Nos.4518/18 & 4520/18
'X' (Assumed name) ..... Petitioner
Through : Ms.Naomi Chandra, Advocate.
versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI ..... Respondent
Through : Ms.Radhika Kolluru, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.GARG, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for transfer of
the Sessions Case No.320/2017 registered vide FIR No.291/2016
under Sections 376D/509/506/34 IPC at Police Station Palam,
presently pending trial before the Court of leaned ASJ at Dwarka
Court.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
have examined the file. Petitioner's apprehension is that her evidence
is not being recorded correctly by the learned Presiding Officer; she
does not have confidence in the fairness of the proceedings.
3. This Court finds no substance in the allegations.
Petitioner's apprehension for not getting fair trial is imaginary.
Record reveals that application moved by one of the co-accused
Sandeep under Section 227 Cr.P.C. for discharge was dismissed by an
order dated 10.07.2017 by the learned Presiding Officer. On
18.07.2017, charge was framed against all the accused persons and
short date to record the statement of the prosecutrix was given as
01.08.2017. On that day, after X's part-examination, it was deferred
on her request as she was not feeling well. On 10.08.2017, her
husband appeared and sought adjournment as 'X' was out of station.
The matter was listed for 06.09.2017. On that day, she was partly
cross-examined and her further cross-examination was deferred as she
was not feeling well. On 25.09.2017, the prosecutrix was not present
and it was informed that she had filed an application for transfer
before the learned District & Sessions Judge. During the pendency of
the transfer petition, the matter was adjourned on several dates.
Finally, after the dismissal of the transfer petition, the prosecutrix was
again asked to appear through her counsel Mr.N.P.Singh, Advocate. It
was recorded on 11.01.2018 that the complainant had filed an
application for cancellation of bail. Complainant's counsel informed
that despite his attempts, he was not able to contact the prosecutrix.
On 25.01.2018, she did not appear and bailable warrants were issued
to secure her presence. Similar was the position on 09.02.2018 though
her counsel Mr.N.P.Singh, Advocate from legal aid was present. On
26.02.2018, prosecutrix's husband moved an application for
exemption as 'X' was not felling well. On 12.03.2018, she did not
appear despite repeated calls. Finally, complainant's counsel
informed that she had left the Court without informing him. On
13.03.2018 on moving the application, the victim's warrants were
recalled. On 19.03.2018 on her request, the date of hearing was
changed to 06.04.2018.
4. Perusal of the record reveals that despite various
opportunities granted, prosecutrix has not presented herself for
examination. The Trial Court has given short dates to record her
statement. It is unclear as to why the prosecutrix who is 45 years of
age and is accompanied by her husband and is assisted by the counsel
Mr.N.P.Singh, Advocate, is avoiding to record her statement. Record
further reveals that on that day when her statement was recorded
before the Trial Court, support person from DCW i.e. Ms.Vandana
Chauhan was also present.
5. This Court finds no cogent reasons to transfer the petition
merely because the prosecutrix has unfounded apprehension of not
getting fair trial. The learned District and Sessions Judge has taken
note of all these facts; the dismissal of the transfer petition by the
learned District & Sessions Judge is based upon fair appreciation and
no intervention is called for.
6. The transfer petition being unmerited is dismissed. It is,
however, expected that victim's statement shall be recorded in camera.
7. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
8. Trial Court record be sent back immediately with the
copy of the order.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
APRIL 19, 2018 / tr
