New Delhi, (Samajweekly) The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a plea by senior leader of Samajwadi party Azam Khan seeking transfer of trial in a forgery case outside the state.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Khan, submitted before a bench headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud that his client would not get a fair trial in Uttar Pradesh and pointed out that several cases have been registered against him in the state.
Sibal added that he was convicted in a case and during the pendency of his section 482 petition seeking production of additional evidence in the high court, the conviction resulted in him losing the Rampur seat.
The bench, also comprising Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and P.S. Narasimha, said if the petitioner is aggrieved by any interlocutory order, he can approach the Allahabad High Court.
Sibal pressed that his client was being harassed, as several FIRs have been registered against him in Uttar Pradesh. He claimed that forged documents were produced against his client and the trial court was proceeding with the matter without considering his objections.
The bench said: “As of now, we don’t have any material to transfer the case.”
Sibal insisted that his client would not get justice in the state and added that even this court has commented on the high court, which did not pass an order for three months in bail after reserving it. Declining to entertain Khan’s plea, the top court said he can approach the high court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Sibal said Khan faces nearly 100 FIRs and claimed multiple cases were lodged against him in the same matter. However, the bench said that trial is being conducted and witnesses’ statements are being recorded and this is not a ground for transfer. It added, “You can ask for transfer to any other district. But you are saying they won’t hear anywhere in the state. Sorry!”
The top court orally observed that a wrong order is not a ground to infer bias and transfer the trial from the state.
He contended that three cases were registered in connection with alleged fabrication of date of birth of his client’s son Abdullah Azam Khan. After hearing arguments, the top court declined to entertain Khan’s plea but granted him liberty to move before the high court.
