Crl. Misc. No. M-35771 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- Crl. Misc. No. M-35771 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:- 4.3.2011 Dalip Kumar Sareen ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & Ors. ... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present:- Mr. C.L.Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.S.Bajwa, DAG, Punjab. Mr. S.P.Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Gurdev Singh, J (oral) Heard. This petition under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by Dalip Kumar Sareen, petitioner, for the transfer of the case pertaining to the cancellation of FIR No. 63 dated 28.6.2008, registered under Sections 417, 419, 468, 469, 471, 120-B IPC in Police Station Division No.8, Ludhiana, and the protest petition filed therein and titled “State Vs. Vijay B. Verma and Ors” from the Court of Sh. Ajay Mittal, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ludhiana to court of competent jurisdiction outside the District of Ludhiana. The grounds taken therein is that both the parties are advocates practicing in District Courts at Ludhiana and the tension brews up in the Court when they appear as a result of which there is no congenial atmosphere or decorum in the Court. The application filed by the petitioner Crl. Misc. No. M-35771 of 2009 (O&M) -2- for the inspection of the record was dismissed by the Presiding Officer on the ground that the accused had not been summoned. Respondent No.2 is an influential person and the petitioner has apprehension that he will not get the justice from the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ludhiana and fair and impartial decision is not expected. All these grounds have been controverted by non-official respondents. Mere rejection of the application for inspection of the record, may be wrongly, is not a ground for coming to the conclusion that the Judicial Magistrate is tilted in favour of any party and will not decide the case on merits. It has not been stated in the petition as to how the respondent No.2 is an influential person. The petitioner as well as respondents No.2 to 4 are practicing advocates in the District Court at Ludhiana and whatever influence can be exercised by the one party, the same can be exercised by the other party, being similarly situated. This Court has not been able to appreciate that there is no congenial atmosphere or decorum in the Court when the parties are appearing in the Court. They being the officers of the Court, in their capacity as Advocates, while appearing in the Court as complainant/accused are bound to maintain decorum and congenial atmosphere. Nothing has been brought on the record on the basis of which it may be concluded that the concerned Presiding Officer will not be conducting a fair and impartial enquiry. No ground is made out for transferring the case and the petition is hereby dismissed. March 4, 2011 (Gurdev Singh) tripti Judge