1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.1430 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).Nos. 1 & 2 of 2011 Thomas Kumar ... Petitioner Vs State rep. by the Inspector of police Pattukkottai Taluk Police Station Pattukkottai Thanajvur District ... Respondent (Crime No.43 of 2010) PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to transfer the case in S.c.No. 309 of 2010, pending on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai, to any other District and Sessions Court in the nearby Districts. For Petitioner : Mr. S.R.A.Ramachandran For Respondent : Mr. L.Murugan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to transfer the case in S.c.No. 309 of 2010, pending on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai, to any other District and Sessions Court in the nearby Districts. 2. Heard Mr.Mr. S.R.A.Ramachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. L.Murugan, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent. 3. The case of the petitioner is as follows: One Parthiban gave a complaint against the petitioner and his father with an allegation that the petitioner and his family members are exclusively using the public toilet and prohibit the villagers from using the same and on the said motive, the petitioner and his father have allegedly assaulted the de-facto complainant and caused injuries Thereafter, the de-facto complainant admitted in the Government Medical College Hospital, Thanjavur and the respondent police recorded the statement and registered a case in Crime No. 43 of 2010 for the alleged offences under Sections 448 and 307 of IPC. Subsequently, the de-facto complainant died on 11.03.2010 and the said case has been altered into Sections 452, 424 and 302 of IPC. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that after the investigation, the respondent police filed the charge sheet against the petitioner and his father and after committal it was taken on file in S.C.No. 309 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai. He would further submit in his argument that during the pendency of the investigation, the de-facto complainant's friends made an attempt of retaliation against the petitioner and his family members, on 22.03.2010 and for that, one Alex Edison, the petitioner's brother, preferred a complaint before the respondent police and they also issued a receipt vide in CSR No 101/10, but no action has been taken by the respondent police. He would further submit in his argument that on 30.5.210, the friends of the deceased entered into the house with deadly weapons and brutally attacked the father of the petitioner and due to the death cry raised by the petitioner's father, the village people assembled in front of the house and the accused persons escaped from the scene of occurrence and after that, the village people rescued the petitioner's mother and brother. He would also submit in his argument that again the brother of the petitioner preferred a complaint before the respondent police about the retaliatory occurrence and the same was registered by the respondent police in Crime No. 121 of 2010 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 460 and 302 of IPC against 7 named accused persons. He would also submit in his argument that the abovesaid case has been committed to the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC – II), Pattukkottai, in S.C.No. 309 of 2010 and the accused persons are now searching the petitioner in order to murder the petitioner and if the petitioner enters to Pattukkottai for the trial of the case, the petitioner's life will be in danger and therefore, the petitioner is also facing much difficulty to conduct the trial by engaging a Senior Advocate Hence, he would request the Court that suitable orders may be passed to transfer the case. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit in his argument that on the basis of the complaint given by the de-facto complainant, a case has been registered in Crime No.43 of 2010 against the petitioner and his father as accused persons for the offences under Sections 448, 307 and 302 of IPC., and subsequently altered to 452, 424. He would further submit in his argument that the reasons stated for the transfer of the case is not sufficient. He would further submit that the respondent police is ready to give protection to the petitioner in Court premises on the dates of hearing and therefore, there is no need to order transfer of the case. 6. I have paid anxious thoughts to the arguments advanced on either side. 7. It is no doubt true that one Parthiban gave a complaint against the petitioner and his father with an allegation that the petitioner and his family members are exclusively using the public toilet and prohibit the villagers from using the same and on the said motive, the petitioner and his father assaulted the de-facto complainant and caused injuries. Thereafter, the de-facto complainant admitted in the Government Medical College Hospital, Thanjavur and the respondent police recorded the statement and registered a case in Crime No. 43 of 2010 for the alleged offences under Sections 448 and 307 of IPC. Subsequently, the de-facto complainant died on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 11.03.2010 and the said case has been altered into Sections 452, 424 and 302 of IPC. After the investigation, the respondent police filed the charge sheet against the petitioner and his father and after committal it was taken on file in S.C.No. 309 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai. During the pendency of the investigation, the de-facto complainant's friends made an attempt of retaliation against the petitioner and his family members, on 22.03.2010 and for that, one Alex Edison, the petitioner's brother, preferred a complaint before the respondent police and thereafter on 30.5.2010, the friends of the deceased entered into the house with deadly weapons and brutally attacked the father of the petitioner and due to the said attack, the petitioner's father died and the accused persons escaped from the scene of occurrence and after that, the village people rescued the petitioner's mother and brother Again the brother of the petitioner preferred a complaint before the respondent police about the retaliatory murder and the same was registered by the respondent police in Crime No. 121 of 2010 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 460 and 302 of IPC against 7 named accused persons. The abovesaid case has been committed to the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC – II), Pattukkottai, in S.C.No. 309 of 2010 and the accused persons are now searching the petitioner in order to murder the petitioner and if the petitioner enters to Pattukkottai for the trial of the case, the petitioner's life will be in danger and therefore, the petitioner is also facing much difficulty to conduct the trial by engaging a Senior Advocate. Hence, the case pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai, in S.C.No. 309 of 2010, has to be ordered to transfer to the learned Principal Sessions Court, Pudukkottai. 8. The reasons submitted by the petitioner cannot be simply brushed aside despite, police is ready to provide protection to the petitioner Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the transfer could be ordered as sought for. 9. For the foregoing reasons, the case in S.C.No. 309 of 2010 pending on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai, is ordered to be transferred to the file of the learned Principal Sessions Court, Pudukkottai, in order to help both parties to have a fair trial with a free mind to conduct the case. The transferor Court, namely, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai, is directed to duly index all the records and to send the case records to the transferee Court, Pudukkottai, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The transferee Court, namely, the learned Principal Sessions Court, Pudukkottai, is also directed to receive the said papers and to post the case within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the records and to proceed with the case in accordance with law and to dispose the case within a period of two months and to report the compliance to this Court. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this Petition is ordered. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accounts) /TRUE COPY/ Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 To 1. The Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-II), Pattukkottai. 2. The Principal Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai. 3. The Inspector of police, Pattukkottai Taluk Police Station, Pattukkottai, Thanajvur District. 4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Copy to: The Section Officer, Criminal Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,Madurai. +1cc to Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandaran, Advocate SR.No.4510 Crl.O.P.(MD).No.1430 of 2011 04.02.2011 vsg PA/25.02.2011/4P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/