UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus SHIROMANI GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITEE & ORS.

Citation: [1986] 3 S.C.R. 472 · Decided: 05-08-1986 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SABYASACHI MUKHERJI · Disposal: Case Allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 
1-
v. 
SHIROMANI GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMI1TEE & 
B 
ORS. 
AUGUST 5, 1986 
[SABYASACHI MUKHARil AND K.N. SINGH, JJ.] 
'f-
Transfer of suit-Power of Supreme Court to transfer suit for the 
, 
,... 
t 
~ 
ends of justice-Whether suit, claiming damages of Rs. l,000 crores for 
causing loss to movable and immovable properties of the various -
Gurdwaras against the petitioners is a fit case for transfer-Code of 
Civil Procedure section 25, explained. 
D 
Respondents I and 2 tiled a suit against the petitioners/defen-
.,j 
dants claiming damages of Rs.1,000 crores from the petitioners for 
causing loss to movable and immovable properties of tbe various 
Gurdwaras being administered and managed by respondent No. I 
under the provisions of the Punjab Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 during 
the period from June to September 84. They also sought mandatory 
E 
injunction directing the petitioners and their principal functionaries to 
tender unqualified apology before the Sikh Sangat for causing mental, 
If 
sentimental, social and spiritual setback and also for causing deep sense 
of injury to the honour and self-respect of Sikhs who are law-abiding 
citizens. Besides, an application to sue as indigent persons under Order 
33, Rule I and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed. It was alleged -
F 
in the plaint that on 3rd Jone, 1984 the Martyrdom day of Shri Guru 
~ 
Arjun Devji, when a large number of devotees came to the Golden 
Temple complex at Amritsar to commemorate the said occasion the 
various units of the Armed Forces under the employment of the 
>(-
petitioners as well as Police units under the employment of petitioners 
and the Government of Punjab with malice launched an attack in the 
G 
Golden temple complex by resort to indiscriminate and barbaric firing. 
The defence of the petitioners was that it was an Act of State necessary 
for the security and integrity of the State and that the action taken was 
an exercise of sovereign power in respect of sovereign acts. The petition-
ers in view of the extra ordinary situation prevailing in the State of 
Punjab in general and in Amritsar in particular moved the present 
H 
transfer petition under section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, aver-
472 
-} 
1 
x 
-
-
( 
-"; 
U.0.1. v. S.G.P.C. [MUKHARJI,J.] 
473 
ring that it is not possible to have a fair trial of the case in Amritsar or 
other parts ol Punjab since the suit is an unusual one and tiled at a critical 
time in Punjab. The question is whether the ends of justice requires the 
transfer of the suit from the State of Punjab to any other State. 
Allowing the petition, the Court, 
HELD: 1. The power of the Supreme Court to transfer a suit or 
proceeding from one State to another State is a power which should be 
used with circumspection and caution but if the ends of justice so 
demand in an appropriate case, the Court should not hesitate to act. 
One of the highest principles in the administration of law is that justice 
should not only to be done but.should be seen to be done. [476D-E; Cl 
2. In this case, in view ol the nature ol allegations regarding some 
ol the respondents who have been added. strong leelings are likely to be 
roused in some section of community. In such an atmosphere to meet 
the ends of justice it would be desirable to have the case transferred to a 
calmer and quieter atmosphere. Justice would be done in such a way. 
To col!tend that no extra ordinary atmosphere exist in Punjab would he 
to contend for an unreality. The suit is also unusual and sensitive and 
the time is critical. Therefore, the Supreme Court should act by trans-
fering the case outside the State of Punjab to meet the ends of justice. 
That is an absolute imperative in this case. [476D-F] 
G.X. Francis & Ors. v. Banke Bihari Singh & Anr., AIR 1958 SC 
309; Hazara Singh Gill v. The State of Punjab, [1964] (4) SCR 1; and 
State of Assam v. Atul Vohra, Transfer Petition No. 21/80 referred to. 
(The Court directed the case to be transferred to Delhi High Court 
to be tried by a learned Single Judge on the original side.) [477D] 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Transfer Petition No. 212 
of 1986 
Under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. 
M.K. Banerji, Solicitor General, A.K. Ganguli, R.D. Agarwala, 
and Miss Sushma Relhan for the Petitioners. 
Hardev Singh, S.S. Sood, Bisharnber Lal and R.S. Sodhi for the 
Respondents. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
474 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1986] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
The
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.