IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-28395 of 2011 Date of Decision : September 26, 2011 Harjinder Singh and others ….Petitioners Versus Harinder Singh …. Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. A.S. Khinda, Advocate T.P.S. Mann, J. (Oral) Prayer has been made for transfer of complaint No.13 dated 15.5.2007 under Sections 326, 324, 323, 34 IPC titled as “Harinder Singh Vs. Harjinder Singh and others” pending in the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sultanpur Lodhi to a Court of the competent jurisdiction, either at Moga or Jagraon. The only plea taken by the petitioners, who are facing trial in the aforementioned criminal complaint is that the complaint had been filed by the respondent as a counter blast to FIR No. 242 dated 1.12.2004 under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC registered at Police Station Dharamkot, at the instance of Gurmail Singh-petitioner against the father of the respondent. In support of their plea, the petitioners have relied upon the enquiry report dated 20.9.2007 Annexure P.4 conducted by the Deputy Criminal Misc. No. M-28395 of 2011 -2- Superintendent of Police, Sultanpur Lodhi wherein it was found that no occurrence had taken place in the marriage party and only heated arguments were exchanged. A perusal of the medico-legal report Annexure A.1 would reveal that there were five injuries found on the person of the respondent when he was medico-legally examined on 20.11.2006 at 7.50 P.M. Out of them, two were the result of the sharp edged weapon. Injury No.3, which was an incised wound on the right thumb of the injured, is reported to have been declared grevious in nature. Once it is prima facie established that the respondent had received injuries on his persons for which he was medico-legally examined soon thereafter, it cannot be said that only heated arguments were exchanged between the parties or that filing of the complaint was a measure of counter blast to the FIR No.242 dated 1.12.2004 earlier got registered by Gurmail Singh-petitioner against the father of the respondent. Resultantly, there is no merit in the petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. ( T.P.S. MANN ) September 26, 2011 JUDGE satish