Consider relevant factors while transferring cases: SC

New Delhi, Mar 18 (UNI) The Supreme Court has ruled that while transferring a case from one state to another the court must take into consideration the comparative inconvenience and hardships likely to be caused to the witnesses as well as additional burden on state exchequer in making payment of travelling and other expenses of the official and non official witnesses.

A bench comprising Justices C K Thakker and Lokeshwar Singh Panta while dismissing a petition filed by the 72-year-old wife of a retired Lt Colonel seeking transfer of two criminal cases from Rampur in Uttar Pradesh to Delhi observed ''The comparative inconvenience of the litigant parties are not the only criteria for transferring the cases from one state to another state, but the court has to visualize the comparative inconvenience and hardships likely to be caused to the witnesses besides, the burden to be borne by the state exchequer in making payments of travelling and other expenses of the official and non official witnesses, for attending the court proceedings.'' The court also noted ''The criminal courts situated at Delhi or Chandigarh are already overburdened with the pendency of the cases and it would not be in the interest of both the litigating parties as well as justice to add more cases to the dockets of the transferee court to keep the trial of the cases pending for decades.'' The court directed the petitioner Parminder Kaur who along with her husband is involved in litigation, both civil and criminal, with the younger brother of her husband Har Gursaran Singh over a 23-acres land dispute, that if she apprehends any threat to her life or property she could bring it to the notice of police or the trial court for appropriate action.

The couple has four daughters, settled in US.

Civil cases filed by the petitioner have already been transfered to Delhi.

Har Govind Singh had appointed his younger brother as his attorney on April 3, 1970 and the power of attorney was revoked on July 29, 1975 and despite this, according to the petitioner, Gursaran Singh sold their property fraudulently to his close relative and got the same mutated in their name.

The court in its judgement dated March 14 also noted that Mrs Kaur was a lady of means and has been travelling from India to US and has not been able to prove her allegations against the respondent and her transfer petition is dismissed.

The court also disposed off another petition as the petitioner has already surrendered her passport to the trial court.

UNI