LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
โš–๏ธ Ask the AI about your situation:๐Ÿš— Car Accident๐Ÿ’ผ Work / Job๐Ÿ  Housing / Eviction๐Ÿ‘ช Family / Divorce๐Ÿ“‹ Contract Dispute๐Ÿ’ฐ Money Owed

NAHAR SINGH YADAV & ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2010] 13 S.C.R. 851 · Decided: 19-11-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[201 OJ 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 851 
NAHAR SINGH YADAV & ANR. 
A 
V. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(Special Leave Petition (C) No. 12981 of 2008) 
NOVEMBER 19, 2010 
B 
[D.K. JAIN, V.S. SIRPURKAR AND G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s. 406(2) - Power 
of Supreme Court to transfer cases and appeals - Criminal 
complaint - Allegation of fraudulent withdrawal of huge sum 
C 
of money in name GPF of class IV court employees by court 
staff - Issuance of notification u/s. 6 of 1946 Act by State 
Government to transfer investigation to CBI - Charge sheet 
filed by CBI against former judges and employees of district 
court - CBI seeking transfer of trial from Ghaziabad court to o 
some other court of competent jurisdiction, preferably Delhi 
- Maintainability of - Held: On issuance of notification by 
State Government uls. 6 of DSPE Act, CBI assumes role of 
an investigating agency and also of prosecuting agency in 
the particular case and, thus, it is entitled to move an 
E 
application u/s. 406(2) - However, apprehension entertained 
F 
by CBI that the trial of the case at Ghaziabad may not be fair, 
resulting in miscarriage of justice is misplaced -
Apprehension of bias could not be based on a bald a/legation 
that trial judge and some of the named accused had been 
close associates and some of the witnesses are judicial 
officers - Acceptance of such a/legation, without something 
more substantial undermines the credibility and the 
independence of the entire judiciary of a State - Also plea 
that the court of Special Judge, CBI, Ghaziabad is already 
heavily over-burdened cannot be accepted - Application of G 
CBI for transfer of trial from Ghaziabad to any other place is 
dismissed- Penal Code, 1860- ss. 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 
477A and 120-B - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - ss. 
851 
H 
852 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010) 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A 
8, 9, 13(2) rlw s. 13 (1) (d) and 14 - Delhi Special Police 
Establishment Act, 1946 - s. 6 - Scam - Ghaziabad Provident 
Fund Scam - Transfer Petition - Judiciary. 
B 
s. 406(2) - Power of Supreme Court to transfer criminal 
trial - Exercise of - Factors to be kept in mind - Discussed. 
A.R. Antulay vs. R.S. Nayak and Anr. (1988) 2 SCC 602; 
Zahira Habibul/a H. Sheikh vs. State of Gujarat and Ors. 
(2004) 4 SCC 158; Maneka Sanjay Gandhi and Anr. vs. Rani 
Jethma/ani (1979) 4 SCC 167; Abdul Nazar Madani vs. State 
C of T.N. and Anr. (2000) 6 SCC 204; K. Anbazhagan Vs. 
D 
E 
F 
G 
Superintendent of Police and Ors. (2004) 3 SCC 767; Captain 
Amarinder Singh vs. Parkash Singh Badal and Ors. (2009) 
6 SCC 260; R. Balakrishna Pillai vs. State of Kera/a (2000) 
7 sec 129 - referred to. 
Case Law Reference: 
(1988) 2 sec 602 
Referred to 
Para 10 
(2004) 4 sec 158 
Referred to 
Para 18 
(1979) 4 sec 167 
Referred to 
Para 19 
c2000) 6 sec 204 
Referred to 
Para 20 
c2004) 3 sec 767 
Referred to 
Para 21 
(2009) 6 sec 260 
Referred to 
Para 22 
(2000) 1 sec 129 
Referred to 
Para 23 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : SLP (Civil) No. 
12981 of 2008. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 19.03.2008 of the High 
Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 
12660 of 2008. 
G.E. Vahanvati, AG, Mukul Rohtagi, S.R. Singh, Shail Kr. 
H Dwivedi, AAG, K.C. Kaushik, Braj Kishore Mishra, Abhishek 
NAHAR SINGH YADAV & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & 853 
ORS. 
Tadav, Vikram, Tanushree Sinha, Prashant Bhushan, Viplav 
A 
Sharma (in-person), Chinmoy P. Sharma, T.A. Khan, A.K. 
Sharma, Anil Katiyar , B. Krishna Prasad, Gunnam 
Venkateswara Rao, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Vandana 
Mishra, Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, Ashok K. Srivastava, Diksha 
Rai, Shaiwal Srivastava, Sanjay Jain, Amit Kumar Sharma, 
B 
E.C. Agrawala, Manoj Prasad, Sadashiv Gupta, Satendra 
Singh Kashyap, Rohit Singh, Ajay Srivatava, Krishna Kumar 
Srivastava, D.N. Dubey, Nishant Yadav, Avnish Singh, Yash Pal 
Dhingra, Sunita Pandit, Himanshu Tyagi, R.S. Yadav, Ujjawal 
Pandey, Asha G. Nair, Ritesh Agrawal, Piyush Sharma, E.G. c 
ยท Vidyasagar, Vishwajit Singh, Veera Kaul Singh, Siddharth 
Sengar, Abhindra Maaheshwari, Pankaj Singh for the 
appearing parties. 
lhe Order of the Court was delivered by 
D.K. JAIN, J. 1. The short question raised by the Central 
Bureau of Investigation (for short "the CBI"), Anti Corruption 
Branch, Ghaziabad in their affidavit dated 15th July 2010, for 
D 
our consideration is whether or not the trial arising out of the 
chargesheet filed by the CBI in Case RC-1 (A)/2008/CBl/ACB/ 
E 
Ghaziaba

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.