Read Order: Arfina v. State of Haryana and others

Tulip  Kanth 

Chandigarh, October 18, 2021: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a Petition seeking transfer of investigation of a case pertaining to an FIR registered under Sections 454, 457, 380, 427, 506 of the IPC.

The facts that came forward from the pleadings pertained to a dispute on July 24, 2020 between two groups of the village. An FIR was registered under various sections of the IPC and the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Bicchor, District Nuh against husband of the petitioner, who was taken to judicial custody. 

Thereafter, Reshim one of affected party approached this Court by filing a Petition seeking directions for registration of FIR. The petition was disposed of on September 18, 2020 on the statement of the State counsel that representation dated August 21, 2020 of the petitioner would be decided within three weeks. On the basis of representation, an FIR dated October 6, 2020 was registered.

The grievance now raised was that there has been no headway in the investigation of the FIR and no action is being taken against the respondents (arrayed in the petition). It was also stated in the pleadings that respondents are hand-in-glove with the police officials, hence the investigation should be transferred.

As per the counsel for the State, there were versions and cross-versions of the incident. Family members of the petitioner are accused in two more FIRs and investigation is going on.

The Bench of Justice Avneesh Jhingan reiterated that transfer of investigation should be done in exceptional cases. 

“In the present case transfer is being sought merely on a bald statement that private respondents are hand-in-glove with the local police authorities. The allegation is based on surmises and conjecture. The matter is still under investigation, there are versions and cross-versions of the incident. No case is made out for transfer of investigation”, noted the Bench.

The Court also referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and others and opined that for the redressal of grievance that there is no headway in investigation of FIR, the petitioner has alternative remedy and no case is made out for interference by this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C.

0 CommentsClose Comments

Leave a comment