In a significant ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court emphasized the sanctity of a fair trial by transferring a cheating case to another district after local advocates refused to represent the petitioner against accused lawyers. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar invoked Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), noting that undue influence by the accused—practicing advocates in the same district—compromised the petitioner’s right to justice.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Daljit Singh, had filed an FIR (No. 89/2018) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the IPC, alleging that the respondents forged a Will in his late uncle’s name to usurp property. The accused included advocates practicing in Amritsar, where the trial was pending. Shockingly, no local lawyer was willing to represent Daljit Singh, fearing professional backlash.
Read also:- Income Tax Notice on Invalid PAN Quashed by Kerala High Court
"The inability of a litigant to secure legal assistance due to undue influence violates fair trial principles," observed Justice Brar, citing Supreme Court precedents.
The court relied on:
Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004): Highlighted the need for a neutral atmosphere for effective legal participation.
Maneka Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani (1979): Stressed that denial of legal aid undermines justice.
Read also:- Allahabad HC Caps Photo-Identification Fee at ₹125, Bars Compulsory Higher Charges for Litigants
State counsel confirmed that an ASI’s inquiry validated the petitioner’s claim, though the local bar association refused to formally acknowledge the bias.
The court transferred the trial from Amritsar to Hoshiarpur, directing:
- The Sessions Judge, Amritsar, to hand over records to Hoshiarpur.
- Parties to appear before the Hoshiarpur court within four weeks.
"Justice must not only be done but seen to be done," the court reiterated, quoting K. Anbazhagan v. Superintendent of Police (2004).
Mr. Pratap Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Nitesh Sharma, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Lokesh Garg, Advocate for Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 5. Title: DALJIT SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Mr. Pratap Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Nitesh Sharma, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Lokesh Garg, Advocate for Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 5.
Title: DALJIT SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS