Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Transfer Of Murder Case Against Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh

The Court was hearing the plea filed by the son of the deceased Ranjeet Singh (allegedly murdered by Ram Rahim Singh), who sought transfer of the case to another CBI court in Punjab, Haryana, or Chandigarh

The Bench of Justice Avneesh Jhingan was of the view that the apprehensions of the petitioner weren't reasonable, but were based upon surmises and conjectures.

Importantly, noting that the trial of the matter is at the stage of pronouncement of judgment, the Court observed thus:

"The petitioner in garb of transfer petition cannot be permitted to have bench of his choice or to get result of trial as per his wishes. With the advancement of technology and activism of social media, the allegation leveled by such litigants needs to be scrutinized very carefully. On asking of apprehensive litigant, transfer of trial at fag end would result in browbeating the Judge and interference in fair administration of justice."

Earlier, the Court had restrained the special CBI judge, Panchkula from pronouncing the verdict on August 26, in the Ranjit Singh's murder case, who was allegedly killed by Dera Chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh.

The Special CBI judge Panchkula, Sushil Kumar Garg, was set to pronounce verdict on August 26, however, the Bench of Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan had restrained the Court from doing so.

The plea before the Court

Jagseer Singh, the son of late Ranjeet Singh had alleged in his plea that the presiding judge conducting the trial was unduly influenced by the accused through respondent No. 2 (public prosecutor of CBI).

He also alleged that though the prosecutor was not directly linked to the case, however, he was found to be interfering with the trial and was taking undue interest and wields undue influence on the presiding officer.

Court's observations

The Court opined that High Court's power under Section 407(1) Cr.P.C. to transfer the trial from the subordinate criminal court can be exercised if the fair or impartial trial is not possible, however, the Court added, it is clear that on mere apprehension trial cannot be transferred.

Further, stressing that there cannot be a straight-jacketed formula for transfer of trial, the Court reiterated that the apprehension must be reasonable and not imaginary and that the power of transfer is to be sparingly exercised.

Regarding the allegations of the presence of the public prosecutor (not related to the instant case) during the trial, the Court noted that the same was duly explained in the pleadings by the CBI.

The Court was of the view that since he is a regular Public Prosecutor in CBI Court at Panchkula and also because the Senior Public Prosecutor and a Special Public Prosecutor have been specifically appointed to represent CBI in this case, therefore, the Court noted that being a designated Public Prosecutor in the court, his presence is obvious and being regular in Court, he can lend assistance to his colleagues.

Case title - Jagseer Singh Petitioner v. Central Bureau of Investigation and others

Click Here To Download Order/Judgment

Read Order/Judgment