CHANDER SHARMA @ KAKU AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Transfer Petition (Crl.), 67 of 2017, Judgment Date: Apr 25, 2017

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURSIDCITON

                  TRANSFER PETITION (CRL.)  NO. 67 OF 2017


CHANDER SHARMA @ KAKU AND ANR.                                 …PETITIONERS

                                   VERSUS

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR.                               …RESPONDENTS


                                  O R D E R

S.ABDUL NAZEER, J.


In this transfer petition filed under Section 406 of the  Code  of  Criminal
Procedure, the petitioners have sought for transfer of criminal  proceedings
in case No.33-8/7 of 2016 arising out of FIR No.77  dated  16th  June,  2014
P.S. Sadar Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal  Pradesh,  from  the  Court  of
Additional Session Judge, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh to  any  other  Court  of
competent jurisdiction outside the State of Himahal Pradesh.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is an immense  threat
to the life  and  security  of  the  petitioners  in  Shimla.   The  Lawyers
Associations of the entire State of Himachal Pradesh  have  decided  not  to
take up petitioners’ case. They have also decided not to permit  an  outside
counsel to defend the petitioners in the case and that there  is  a  general
agitation  in  the  State  of  Himachal  Pradesh  against  the  petitioners.
Moreover, proceedings sought to be transferred are under local media  trial.
 Therefore, in all likelihood petitioners will not be able to get  free  and
fair trial in the State of Himachal Pradesh.
3     The respondents  have  filed  their  counter  affidavit  opposing  the
transfer petition. Learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the  respondent
State submits that the court has appointed learned advocates who  have  more
than ten years standing in the Bar for the accused at  the  expense  of  the
State. Charges have already been framed in the case and the accused  persons
pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Out of 114 prosecution  witnesses,  33
of them have already been examined and that the trial has been fixed on  day
to day basis for recording prosecution evidence.  On  20th  February,  2015,
Shri Sanjeev Kumar, learned  advocate  has  filed  vakalatnama  for  accused
Vikrant Bakshi. The accused persons are being  defended  by  the  legal  aid
counsel, as well  as  learned  advocate  appointed  by  the  accused-Vikrant
Bakshi.
4     Learned counsel for the  petitioners  has  not  denied  the  aforesaid
submission of the learned counsel for the respondent-State.
5     In the circumstances, we do not find any  justification  for  transfer
of this case. The transfer petition is dismissed accordingly.



                                                             …………………………………J.
                                                           (J. CHELAMESWAR)




                                                             …………………………………J.
                                                           (S. ABDUL NAZEER)
New Delhi;
April 25, 2017.