LexCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION versus HOPESON NINGSHEN & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 5 S.C.R. 666 A CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (C.8.1.) B c v. HOPESON NINGSHEN & ORS. (Transfer Petition (Crl.) Nos. 219-220 of 2009) MAY 3, 2010 . .. [K.G. BALAKRISH.NAN, CJI., DEEPAK VERMA AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s. 406 - Transfer of cases of kidnapping and murder against accused, an activist of a militant organization, pending in State of Manipur - Sought by CBI to a court in Delhi - HELD: In order to ensure that a fair trial takes place.in the 0 cases in question, Court must account for the interests of all stakeholders, namely, the accused, the witnesses, the prosecutors, the near relatives of the victims as well as society at large - The instant case presents a complex situation where there is a certain degree of divergence in the interests E of the respective stakeholders - The CBI in its capacity as the investigating agency has clearly conveyed the risks associated with conducting the trial in Manipur - Even assuming that the apprehension about social unrest and communal tension between the Meities and the Nagas were a.little exaggerated, there can be no quarrel that there exists F a real possibility of a physical attack on the respondent- accused as long as he is in Manipur - It was precisely because of this consideration that the respondent-accused is being held in custody at a drstant location in Delhi - Furthermore,. conducting the trial in Manipur could also G reasonably lead to more friction in the State which in turn could affect the trial proceedings - Note must especially be taken of the fact that the killings took place in a region where opinions are sharply divided on the justness of the causes espoused by the NSCN (f M), an organization of which the H 666 CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (C.8.1.) v. 667 HOPESON NINGSHEN & ORS. accused is a member - This creates a risk of intimidation of A witnesses as well as undue prejudice seeping into the minds of those who may be involved in the legal proceedings in· different capacities - In the circumstances, the considered view of the Court is that it would be expedient in the ends of justice to conduct the trial in Delhi - Accordingly, it is directed B that the cases be transferred from the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ukhrul, Manipur to a designated CBI Court (manned by a judicial officer of the rank of a Sessions Judge) in New Delhi - Since there are 52 cited witnesses, CBI has undertaken to arrange for their travel between Manipur c and Delhi, so as to facilitate recording of their testimonies and subsequent cross-examination during trial - It must be remembered that the right of cross~examination is an essential element in the course of a criminal trial - As far as the near relatives of the deceased persons are concerned, the 0 physical distance between Manipur and Delhi may cause some hindrance to their participation in the proceedings, but the transfer of the case is essential - In order to protect their interests, CBI as well as the Government of Manipur is directed to render full assistance to victim's legal heirs in the E matter of legal representation by way of engaging advocates of their choice -The applicant has agreed to arrange for the to-and-fro journey and stay etc., for one member belonging to the families of each of the deceased persons on the dates of hearing. Maneka Sanjay Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani, (1979) 2 SCR 378 = (1979) 4 SCC 167; Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004) 4 SCC 157, referred to. Case Law Reference: (1979) 2 SCR 378 c2004) 4 sec 151 referred to referred to para 10 para 11 CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Transfer Petition F G (Crl.) No. 219-220 of 2009. H 668 SUPREME COURT REPORTS· [2010] 5 S.C.R. A Transfer Petition Under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. P.P. Malhotra, ASG, Siddarth Luthra (A.C.), Colin Gonsalves, Abantee Dutta, Ashdeep Singh, P.K. Dey, Shweta 8 Verma, A.K. Sharma (for B. Krishna Prasad), Kamini Jaiswal, Khwairakpam Nobin Singh for the appearing parties. c The following Order of the Court was delivered ORDER 1. The Central Bureau of Investigation [Hereinafter 'CBI'] has approached this Court by way of Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 219-220 of 2009 .as contemplated under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Pro~edure [Hereinafter 'CrPC'], seeking transfer of cases RC IMPH 2009/S0002 and RC IMPH 2009/ D · S0003, both d
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.