IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-27434 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : September 08, 2011 Dal Chand and others ....Petitioners Versus Rajender and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present :Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate. T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral) Prayer has been made for transfer of Criminal complaint filed by respondent No.1 against the petitioners pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal to any other Court of competent jurisdiction within the Sessions Division of Faridabad. The petitioners had earlier moved learned Sessions Judge, Faridabad for transfer of the complaint but their application was dismissed on 19.8.2011 as being not legally maintainable. Criminal Misc. No.M-27434 of 2011 (O&M) -2- The only ground on which the petitioners are seeking transfer of the case is that complainant Rajender's brother Shri Madan Lal is a practicing Advocate at Palwal. Said Shri Madan Lal, Advocate has a lot of influence over his fellow advocates. On each and every date of hearing of the case, he and several advocates, assemble outside the Court and try to show strength and put pressure on the petitioners. Even during the course of hearing of the case, Shri Madan Lal, Advocate, alongwith many local lawyers, appears before the trial Court. The act and conduct of Shri Madan Lal, Advocate has caused an apprehension in the mind of the petitioners that justice would not be imparted to them at Palwal. Admittedly, the case is now fixed for recording of defence evidence. It is also not denied that Shri Madan Lal, Advocate, brother of Rajender complainant, has joined the profession before the filing of the complaint against the petitioners. Despite the same, when the case had reached practically at its fag end, the petitioners have woken up to file a transfer application. Their application has been dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, Faridabad as not legally maintainable was filed by them as recently as on Criminal Misc. No.M-27434 of 2011 (O&M) -3- 25.7.2011. If they could face the trial of the case for about three years despite the fact that Rajender-complainant's brother was a practising advocate at Palwal, it cannot be said now that they would not be imparted justice by the Court seized of the trial of the case against them. Resultantly, there is no merit in the petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. ( T.P.S.MANN ) September 08, 2011 JUDGE satish