Skip to content


Sheikh Hafeez Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Sheikh Hafeez

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt:


.....under section 482 of cr.p.c.for transfer of the case st no.80/2013 from the court of 3rd additional sessions judge, damoh to any other district. the facts of the case are that the wife of the respondent no.2 has expired, and therefore the respondent no.2 is facing a trial of the offence punishable under sections 304-b, 498-a and 306 of ipc. the applicant is a witness along with his family members.and therefore he has to go and to depose before the trial court. after considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, it appears that the applicant could not show that he visited before the trial court on a particular date due to summons issued by the court. the documents are produced to show that he made a complaint to the superintendent of police, damoh but no specific date is given in that complaint that any threat was given by anyone including the respondent no.2. under such circumstances, the apprehension of the applicant is hypothetical, which cannot be accepted. he has to go before the trial court for once and if the case is transferred to any other place, then the respondent no.2 shall be liable to attend the court of another district on each and every.....

Judgment:


M.Cr.C.No.10331/2013 16.09.2013 Shri A.K.Mishra, Advocate for the applicant.

Heard on admission.

The applicant has filed the present application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.for transfer of the case ST No.80/2013 from the Court of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh to any other district.

The facts of the case are that the wife of the respondent No.2 has expired, and therefore the respondent No.2 is facing a trial of the offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A and 306 of IPC.

The applicant is a witness along with his family membeRs.and therefore he has to go and to depose before the trial Court.

After considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, it appears that the applicant could not show that he visited before the trial Court on a particular date due to summons issued by the Court.

The documents are produced to show that he made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Damoh but no specific date is given in that complaint that any threat was given by anyone including the respondent No.2.

Under such circumstances, the apprehension of the applicant is hypothetical, which cannot be accepted.

He has to go before the trial Court for once and if the case is transferred to any other place, then the respondent No.2 shall be liable to attend the Court of another District on each and every date and the same would be hardship to the respondent No.2.

Under such circumstances, there is no basis by which the present petition can be accepted.

Consequently, it is hereby dismissed at motion stage.

A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court for information.

(N.K.Gupta) Judge Ansari


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //