HC lays down norms for shifting dowry cases

Taking cognisance of the flooding of courts with petitions seeking transfer of dowry harassment cases based on the complainant-wife’s ease, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that comparative convenience of all concerned needs to be taken into consideration. The assertion came as Justice Sumeet Goel laid down six guiding principles governing the transfer of trials.

Justice Goel said the convenience of the complainant-wife was undoubtedly a key consideration, but it could not override the relative convenience and hardship faced by other stakeholders, including the accused, witnesses and the state –– the primary prosecuting agency.

“The complainant/victim-wife, in a matrimonial offence-related FIR, has a right to participate in the trial, in accordance with the law. Yet the state is the prime prosecuting agency…. Convenience, nay comparative convenience, of all concerned is required to be taken into consideration while adjudicating a transfer plea,” Justice Goel asserted

Justice Goel observed that a matrimonial litigation, such as a divorce petition, was primarily between the couple, wherein she was required to independently and solely pursue her case. But the state/police was the main prosecuting agency in FIR cases.

Laying down the principles, the court held that a transfer could only be ordered if a fair trial was not possible at the location where the proceedings were ongoing. Such apprehensions were required to be based on “tangible material” and not mere conjecture.

The Bench added a trial judge’s erroneous order, as corrected by a superior court, could not automatically lead to an inference of bias. It held that “very strong/cogent material” was required to prove bias sufficient to justify the transfer of trial on that ground. Mere fact that the other party in a transfer petition was a lawyer or had a close relationship with an advocate practising in the court was insufficient for transfer unless discernible prejudice is shown.

Justice Goel said universal parameters did not exist for ordering the transfer of trials.