HAZARA SINGH GILL versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1964] 4 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 10-05-1963 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SARKAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-
THE SUPREME COURT 
REPORTS 
HAZARA SINGH GILL 
v. 
IBE STATE OF PUNJAB 
(A. K. SARKAR, M. HmAYATULLAH AND J. C. SHAH, JJ.) 
Critl}inal 
Trial-Transfer 
petition-serious 
allegations-No 
affidavit in reply~Duty of the Court--Code of Criminal Procedu1·c, 
1898 (Act 5 of 1898), s. 527. 
\\There in a petition for transfer of criminal case, very serious 
allegations are made by the petitioner on affidavit which are not 
denied specifically by the other side this court must go by the affi-
davit filed by the petitioner. In proceedings of this kind, the court 
does not examine witnesses in support of allegations of fact made 
by either side. Ordinarily, the court acts upon the affidavit of one 
side or other, but if one side omits to make an affidavit in 
reply, the affidavit of the other side remains uncontroverte<l. 
Held, that where the petitioner, as in the present case, has by 
his affidavit made out a sufficient case from which it is possible 
for the court to infer that he reasonably 
entertains apprehension 
that he \Yould not get justice in his case, the interests of justice 
demand that the case should be transferred outside the State. 
ORIGINAL JuRISDICTION : Transfer Petition No. 9 of 1%3. 
Petition under s. 527 Criminal Procedure Code for 
Transfer of cases Nos. 33/3 and 33/4 of 1%3, under s. 52 
of the Prisons Act, pending in the Court of Magistrate 1st 
Class, Amritsar, to a competent Court outside the State of 
Punjab. 
G. S. Vohra and Harbans Singh, for the petitioner. 
L. D. Kaushal, Deputy Advocate-General for the State 
of Punjab and P. D. Menon, for the resoondent. 
May 10, 1963. The Judgment of the court was deli-
vered by 
1963 
May, 10. 
HmAYATULLAH J.-This is a petition by one Hazara 
Hidayatullak /. 
Singh Gill for the transfer of two criminal cases (Nos. 33/3 
and 33/4 of 1963) under s. 52 of the Prisons Act, pending 
for trial in the court of Mr. Sant Singh, Magistrate, First 
Class, Amritsar. The petitioner requests that <nese cases 
be transferred outside the State of Punjab for disposal. The 
facts, in so far as they have been admitted by the State of 
_., 
Punjab, are as follows: 
The petitioner is a resident of village Rattoke in the 
1963 
Hazara Singh 
Gill 
v. 
The State of 
Punjab 
H idayatul/ah f. 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1964] 
Amritsar District. 
He was elected as member of the 
Punjab Vidhan Sabha in the last General Elections after 
defeating S. Hardip Singh, the brother-in-law of the Chief 
Minister of the State. 
S. Surrinder Singh Kairon, son of 
the Chief Minister, and S. Ranjit Singh Grewal, who was 
posted as Senior Superintendent of Police at Amritsar, 
have married sisters. 
S. Mukund Singh, the father-in-law 
of S. Surrinder Singh, owned vast lands. S. Mukund 
Singh died without leaving any male issue and the estate 
came under the Court of Wards, and the petitioner obtain-
ed some of the lands from the Court of Wards. In May, 
1960, the agi,tation for what is described as the 'Punjabi 
Suba' was started and the petitioner was arrested under 
ss. 411/414, Indian Penal Code, and a report was sent 
against him under s. 107 /151, Cr. P. C., and a warrant was 
also issued. 
The petitioner was held for interrogation 
on a remand by the court. The petitioner was also arrest-
ed in a case under the Arms Act, and another, under the 
Indian Opium Act. 
His father and six others were arrest-
ed on 26-1-1%1 under s. 107 /151, Cr. P. C., but were dis-
charged as a result of compromise in court. 
The peti-
tioner was convicted and sentenced to two years' rigorous 
imprisonment in the case under the Arms Act and that 
sentence has been upheld by the High Court. 
He was 
also convicted in a case under the Prisons Act and sen-
tenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment, which sen-
tence was also confirmed by the High Court. These sen-
tences are to run consecutively. The two cases in which 
the transfer is asked for are now pending and they have 
been referred to the Magistrate by the Superintendent, Jail, 
Amritsar. 
The petitioner points out that another petition 
of S. Mohan Singh Tur was transferred from the Punjab 
to Saharanpur by this Court. 
What is not admitted or evasively denied in the affi-
davit of the State Government are the following facts 
stated by the petitioner on affidavit : After his election 
to the Vidhan Sabha, he has not been able to attend any 
meeting because he has been arrested and continuously 
kept in jail, that the petitioner is a protagonist of the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.