Delhi High Court
Rakesh & Anr vs State & Anr. on 13 January, 2020
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Order Reserved On: 21.11.2019
Order Pronounced On: 13.01.2020
+ TR.P.(CRL.) 32/2019 & CRL.M.A. 9818/2019 (stay)
RAKESH & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Aditya Vikram, Mr.
Avinash and Mr. Dhruv
Chaudhary, Advocates
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for
the State/Respondent no.1
with SI Suraj Kumar, P.S.
Kapashera, South District,
New Delhi
Mr. S.P. Kaushal, Mr. Rahul
Tyagi and Mr. Kumar Bhanu,
Advocates for R-2
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
JUDGMENT
BRIJESH SETHI, J
1. The petitioners have filed present petition u/s. 407 CrPC r/w.
Section 482 CrPC seeking transfer of the proceedings emanating
from FIR No. 272/17, u/s. 323/324/354/452/34 IPC & 25/54/59
Arms Act and FIR no. 273/17, u/s. 308/34 IPC, PS Kapashera,
South-West, from Dwarka Courts to Patiala House Courts for the
reason that petitioners are not being allowed to properly present
their case. The respondents, who are lawyers and practicing at the
Dwarka District Courts, do not allow the petitioners to present their
case properly in the concerned court. They have created a terror in
the mind of the petitioners. It is, therefore, prayed that proceedings
emanating from FIR No. 272/17, u/s. 323/324/354/452/34 IPC &
25/54/59 Arms Act and FIR no. 273/17, u/s. 308/34 IPC, PS
Kapashera, South-West be transferred from Dwarka Courts to
Patiala House Courts.
2. Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.2, on the other hand, has
argued that cases cannot be transferred merely on the asking of the
petitioners/ accused persons as there is nothing on record to suggest
that petitioners were threatened or not allowed to present their case
properly through their Ld. Counsels in the court concerned. No
complaint to this effect has been made before the Ld. Distt. &
Sessions Judge, Dwarka, New Delhi. It is submitted that everyone
has a right to have a lawyer of his choice but no one has any right to
have any court of his/ her choice. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf
of respondent no.2 has submitted that neither respondent no.2 nor
anyone on her behalf, has never misbehaved, manhandled or
threatened the petitioners and their Ld. Counsels and has further
assured that there will not be any threatening or manhandling of the
petitioners and their counsels in future as well.
3. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record.
Though it is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the petitioners that
petitioners are not allowed to properly represent their case and
petitioners have not been able to engage any advocate of their
choice. Perusal of the record, however, reveals that no complaint
was made to the concerned MM that the petitioners are not being
allowed to present their case properly or they have not been able to
engage an advocate of their choice. Perusal of record further reveals
that no complaint has been made to Ld. Distt. & Sessions Judge,
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi to the effect that lawyers of the
petitioners are not being allowed to make submissions on their
behalf. Perusal of the record further reveals that no case was
reported to the police of any incident of manhandling or any act of
violence by the respondent no.2 or her counsels. The FIRs in
question pertain to police station Kapashera which falls under the
jurisdiction of the District South-West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi.
Record further reveals that closure report has been filed in the FIRs
in question and protest petition has been allowed by the Ld. Trial
Court. There is nothing on record which suggests that Ld. Trial
Court is not acting fairly or has been influenced by the respondent
no.2 or her counsels and petitioners are not being allowed to present
their case. This Court had also questioned one of the petitioner, who
was present in the Court, about the allegations levelled against
respondent no.2. He had submitted that no fighting had taken place
inside or outside the Court. There was only some altercation
between the parties but no complaint was lodged with any authority
in this regard.
4. In view of the above facts appearing on record as well as
assurance given by Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.2 to the Court
that respondent no.2 or her counsels have not threatened,
manhandled or misbehaved and will never do so in future and the
petitioners and their counsels can make their submissions without
any threat or pressure from any source whatever, no grounds are
made out to transfer the proceedings emanating from FIR No.
272/17, u/s. 323/324/354/452/34 IPC & 25/54/59 Arms Act and FIR
no. 273/17, u/s. 308/34 IPC, PS Kapashera, South-West, from
Dwarka Courts to Patiala House Courts and present transfer petition
along with pending application is dismissed accordingly.
BRIJESH SETHI, J.
JANUARY, 13, 2020
(Amit)
