Page 1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURSIDCITON

TRANSFER PETITION (CRL.)  NO. 67 OF 2017

CHANDER SHARMA @ KAKU AND ANR. …PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR. …RESPONDENTS

O R D E R

S.ABDUL NAZEER, J.

1 In this transfer petition filed under Section 406 of the Code of

Criminal  Procedure,  the  petitioners  have  sought  for  transfer  of

criminal proceedings in case No.33-8/7 of 2016 arising out of FIR

No.77 dated 16th June, 2014 P.S. Sadar Shimla, District Shimla,

Himachal  Pradesh,  from the  Court  of  Additional  Session  Judge,

Shimla,  Himachal  Pradesh  to  any  other  Court  of  competent

jurisdiction outside the State of Himahal Pradesh.

2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is an

immense threat to the life and security of the petitioners in Shimla.

The Lawyers Associations of the entire State of Himachal Pradesh

have  decided  not  to  take  up  petitioners’  case.  They  have  also

1

Page 2

decided not to permit an outside counsel to defend the petitioners

in the case and that  there is  a general  agitation in the State  of

Himachal  Pradesh against  the  petitioners.  Moreover,  proceedings

sought to be transferred are under local media trial.  Therefore, in

all likelihood petitioners will not be able to get free and fair trial in

the State of Himachal Pradesh.

3 The respondents have filed their counter affidavit opposing the

transfer  petition.  Learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the

respondent  State  submits  that  the  court  has  appointed  learned

advocates who have more than ten years standing in the Bar for

the accused at the expense of the State. Charges have already been

framed in the case and the accused persons pleaded not guilty and

claimed trial. Out of 114 prosecution witnesses, 33 of them have

already been examined and that the trial has been fixed on day to

day basis  for  recording prosecution evidence.  On 20th February,

2015, Shri Sanjeev Kumar, learned advocate has filed vakalatnama

for  accused  Vikrant  Bakshi.  The  accused  persons  are  being

defended  by  the  legal  aid  counsel,  as  well  as  learned  advocate

appointed by the accused-Vikrant Bakshi.

2

Page 3

4 Learned  counsel  for  the  petitioners  has  not  denied  the

aforesaid  submission  of  the  learned  counsel  for  the

respondent-State.

5 In  the  circumstances,  we  do  not  find  any  justification  for

transfer of this case. The transfer petition is dismissed accordingly.

    …………………………………J.     (J. CHELAMESWAR)

    …………………………………J.     (S. ABDUL NAZEER)

New Delhi; April 25, 2017.

3