Accused Can't Choose Place Of Prosecution By Taking Refuge Of Unfounded Security Apprehensions: JKL High Court

Bhalla claimed that the respondent was irked by his social media post about "Two Fake RTI Activists of Doda" which allegedly uncovered respondent's "evil misdemeanors". This led to the criminal defamation complaint and summons were issued to him.

In order to make out a case for transfer, Bhalla submitted that his security and safety are a concern as he apprehends danger to his life because of litigation voiced against the land and liquor mafias, land encroachers, politicians as well as other corrupt bureaucrats who are involved in those cases/PILs.

Contesting the plea the respondent submitted that Bhalla had appeared before the trial Court on 15.04.2022 and had executed an undertaking to appear on each and every date of hearing. It also submitted that it will be inconvenient to the respondent to prosecute his case at Jammu since all his witnesses hail from Doda.

The High Court noted Section 407(1)(c)(ii) of CrPC which provides that any particular case or appeal can be transferred from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction when it is expedient for the ends of justice and general convenience of the parties or witnesses. However, no occasion was made out to exercise this power as the alleged threat perception was not evaluated by any security agency.

It was a mere apprehension and Bhalla had not even complained to any authority to seek security, the Court noted.

The Court further pointed to the convenience of parties, stating that Bhalla would only travel from Jammu to Doda as an individual, whereas the complainant and his witnesses who are all based in Doda will have to face more difficulty, physically as well as financially, to prosecute the complaint at Jammu.

"The petitioner/accused, in the considered opinion of this court, cannot be allowed to have a place of his choice to be prosecuted in a case of defamation, taking refuge of unfounded personal security", the bench added.

Accordingly the bench found the petition without any merit and dismissed the same.

Case Title: Prof S K Bhalla Vs Haq Nawaz Nehru

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 24

Coram: Justice MA Chowdhary

Counsel For Petitioner: Mr. Ankur Sharma

Counsel For Respondent: Mr. R D S Bandral

Click Here To Read/Download Order