HARITA SUNIL PARAB versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

HARITA SUNIL PARAB versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

The petitioner’s apprehension of harm or unfair trial is too nebulous and not reasonable; inconvenience does not override considerations of witness location and public interest. Both FIRs and prosecution are best served if cases remain at their original jurisdictions. Transfer is not warranted.

Parties
Petitioner: Harita Sunil Parab; Respondents: State of NCT of Delhi and Others; Respondent No.2: R. D. Upadhyay
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Transfer Petition (crl.) Nos. 254 255 and 253 of 2017 / Final Order
Outcome
Transfer petitions rejected.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Criminal Proceedings, Fair Trial, Investigation, Witness Inconvenience
Criminal Law Procedure Transfer of Criminal Proceedings Fair Trial Investigation Witness Inconvenience

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harita Sunil Parab

Petitioner

State of NCT of Delhi and Others

Respondents

R. D. Upadhyay

Respondent No.2

Procedural Posture

Transfer Petition (crl.) Nos. 254 255 and 253 of 2017 / Final Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether FIRs registered in Delhi and Ghaziabad should be transferred to Mumbai for trial.
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner’s apprehension of not receiving a fair trial in Delhi is reasonable.
  3. 3 Whether the inconvenience to the petitioner should override other considerations in transfer petitions.

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioner’s apprehension of harm or unfair trial is too nebulous and not reasonable; inconvenience does not override considerations of witness location and public interest. Both FIRs and prosecution are best served if cases remain at their original jurisdictions. Transfer is not warranted.

Court Disposition

Transfer petitions rejected.

Orders

  • Transfer Petition (Crl.) Nos. 254-255 of 2017 rejected.
  • Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 253 of 2017 rejected.