XI—HC—22 WW mm WH%H 06w§k200& Shri Bhishma Kingm‘, caulisd for th€ applicant, Shri Arum Sao, Deputy Govt. Advocaté: for the State on advance copy, Arguments on admission heard. Order passod as foHOWS' QRAL T1115 ls a pehtlon filed > Procedure fo1 transfer of Ses ial No,144}’ 2006, pending in the (“cult of Addl Sesslons Ju mitewada, to any ofhar Court, preferably to Sessmns Court Raj 3m (C G) Tho bnef faC‘ts am that the apphcant was arlested on 7,4.2006 111 connectlon w1th Cr! s No.9/2005 leglstered at Pohce station Konta, Tahsil Su‘kmar stt. Dzmtewada for the otfence punishable. under sections 147, 148, 302/ 149 read with ,gection 120-B IPC and sections 25 65 27 f the Anus Act. It is stated that for the sec 1rity reasons, he is kept in cenna1 jail in Raipur. This transfer p ” relief cainp for victims of the axalite activities) and they are under the influence of Police, refore, there is no possibility of recording their independent evid nee, 11 is moved 011 the ground that e living in Saliva Judum Camp (a e the main Witnesses of this trial It is also alleged that at th time of investigation, they were essurized by the Police and then only they had named the app 'cant in their statements. It is mentined in Para-10 of the petition that the namle 0 r 1 ' d D f s n i '0 .e e r o giii XI—HC-22 m ............ ‘ {Ti mam WW WW ’7’, applicant was falssly inserted by'vtheaPoilic‘e. by re-Writjng the statamants of two impartant wi‘nesses 11amely Podiyam Joga 31. Podiyam Dula and in. this manna the fabrication. of evidence. is writ larga 011 record. It is: also stated that the applicant is suffering from a painful Palmer’g Contracture in his both hands. The further allogations are that them iii fear to the life’of the applicant While traveling from Raipi‘u" to Dantewadaas adequate piotectiou 13 not prowded lt is also stated that Dantewada does not have a very competent bar on cnmmal Side The applicant propoees to engage at any cos a reputed criminal lawyer flom Calcutta to defend his case, bu Calcutta and Dantewada are not eaSily connected. It is a1 o stated that Since stutable infrastructure facilities for lod ing and boarding of a Calcutta baeed leading criminal lawyer at Dantewada arevnot available, therefore] the applicant will iiQt get a' good lawyer’s facility. It is further stated that the appli ant has no faith in the State sponsored counsel and he is also apprehensive of attitude of counsel from a neighbouring dis ict. It is also stated that the road between Raipur and Dantewa is not good which shall trouble the applicant while taking his journey by Bus from Raipur to Dantewada. At the arguments, leame counsel for the applicant himself states that the applicant is a ded Naxalite and. there is every possibility that he will not get fair trial at Dantewada and his case should be transferred fr Dantewada to Wlace d b i o XI—HC—22 WW mm WH%H pr€f6rab1y at Raipur. HE: submits that the atmospha‘a of Dantewada mwn is hostile. to th€ intar‘est of me. applicant. I have heard learned cc unsel fer tha applicapt at length and have also paused thf: mcords of the transfer petition. provides power of High Court to tranefer caeea mid appeals. ‘ \ uh eectiom ) of section 407 provideq that whenever 1t 15 made to ppear to the Hlgh Court that a fan a11d nnpartla1 mquuy or tnal annot he had 1n any Cummal Court subordmate thereto or tha some questlon of law of unusual dliliculty 15 hkely to anse, o that an order under thls sectlon rs required by ally proviaioir of rus: Code, or Will tend to the general convenience of the parties Saction 407 of Cr.P.C. witnesses; or is expedient for the ends of juetice, then, it ma order for transfer of the case as provided in second part of thi sub-section 'Leamecl counsel for he applicant mainly presses this petition on the ground that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be held at Dantewa a. The reason being that it is a. Naxalite effected area and t e applicant has been branded as a Naxalite and that he would e facing many difficultiea pertaining to his health and engagemen of a lawyer of his choice eta, etc. How the applicant will not get a fair and impartial trial at Dantewada has not been sub tantiated in this petition. It appears that it is a mere apprehensio 1 in the mind of the applicant which is not only unfounded, but unreasonable. For the transfer of a ease a. mere allegation that re is apprehension tht ustice ill ‘r i_ e a j w ‘ XI—HC—22 mw,m,m Wm a1 73y MM M01. Q? W WW mm WW Court and the ground'of u the Witnesses of the case likely to be influenced by t ground for transfer of case. paiticular court to another c will not live at the place w] move from the said place to i is transferred to (some other Where they are residing and that place itself which is no‘ present case. The apprehens: The other grounds likc applicant and non-availability for considering a petition. for The illness and non-avail: Dantewada and nearby areas Though the party i3 not required to not b€ done, c1063 not suEme evitably fail, but it has to Show that To judge The reasenableness of the apprehension the state f mind of the person who entertains the apprehension is no dot bt relevant but that is not all. The apprehension must not onl be ontertained but must appear to the conxt to be a reasonable pprehension. Certainly, in this matt r, there are no allegations against the trial is only based on the fact that living in relief camps and they are Police. This cannot be entertained as rely by transferring the case ftoin a urt will not result that the witnesses ere they are living or they will also he new place of trial. Even if the trial place, the Witnesses will reside there they may come to give evidence from ' going to make any din‘eience in the on appears to be unreasonable. s long journey by Bus, disease of the 05 ’ demonstrate that justice will ' its apprehension is reasona le, :w‘ igodd counsel are not at all relevant transfer of a case by the High Court. ability of good criminal lawyer in and infracture facilities etc, for __ i i k ‘ n h‘ e 4 XI—HC—22 WW,W,W Wm WW‘ . f2m’e/WNO 0' w mm WW WW accommodation of a Calcuttz hear a p€tition for transfm‘ ( g€11€ra1 convenience of the. pa: In the. opinion. of this c for entertaining such a peti genoral allegations which c' envisaged u/ s 407 of the CLP. The potition has no 1m motion stage. 1 based Lawyer am not germaiio to 3f a caso as evan they do not load to ties or witnessos. ourt, there. appoars to be. no ground tion which is based on vague. and o not constitute the grounds as C, :Iits. The same is dismissed at the Sd/— SUNIL KUMAR SINHA Judge L v (gin W)