High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/4734/2018dismissed

Mohinder Singh v. State Of Punjab & Others

2018-07-18Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-4734 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 18, 2018 Mohinder Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Pawan Kumar, Senior Advocate with Mr.Rohit Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr. DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 407 Cr.P.C. against respondents State of Punjab, The Director, Bureau of Investigation, Punjab, Inspector/SHO, Sh.Baljinder Singh Bhullar, SHO, Sh.Dharampal, ASI, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana and Varun Chhabra, Patwari, for transfer of trial in case FIR No.07 dated 13.03.2014 under Sections 7, 8, 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, pendingin the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, to any other Court of Session in the State of Punjab, with further prayer that respondents No.4 and 5 may also be transferred to some other place etc.

Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition. Reply by way of affidavit of Senior Vineet Gulati 2018.07.23 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, E.O. Wing, Ludhiana, has been

CRM No.M-4734 of 2018 -2filed and the same is taken on record.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. At the time of arguments, learned State counsel argued that the trial of present FIR has been concluded and as per judgment dated 23.02.2018, accused-respondent No.6 has been acquitted by learned trial Court. Keeping in view the fact that trial has already been concluded, therefore, relief regarding transfer of trial has become infructuous. Further, I find that, as per reply filed by the State, an enquiry has been conducted and respondents No.4 and 5 have been found innocent. It is stated in the reply that it was found during enquiry that no complaint about alleged threat was ever moved by the petitioner either with the local police or with the senior officers of the Vigilance Department. The call details of respondents No.

4 and 5 have also been perused, during which, it was found that they have not made any call to the petitioner. It is also in the reply that respondents No.4 and 5 have already been transferred to Vigilance Bureau, Chandigarh, from Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana. In view of the above discussion and in view of the reply filed by SSP, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, I find that the present petition has become infructuous.

Therefore, present petition stands dismissed as having been rendered infructuous July 18, 2018 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2018.07.23 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh