2016 Supreme(SC) 363

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
T.S. THAKUR, CJI., R. BANUMATHI, UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.
Sujatha Ravi Kiran @ Sujatasahu – Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala & Ors. – Respondents
Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 351 & 384 of 2013 With Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 164 of 2013
Decided On : 12-05-2016

IMPORTANT POINTS
Case can be transferred only on reasonable apprehension that justice will not be done. Mere apprehension of the accused being influential may not be sufficient. Difficulty or inconvenience in pursuing the case at distant place is also not sufficient for transfer of a case.
Power to transfer investigation must be exercised rarely in exceptional circumstances.

Headnote:(a) Administration of justice – Transfer of case – Petitions u/s 482 CrPC filed in Kerala High Court – Investigation in progress by a special team of Kerala Police – Petition for transferring the cases to Delhi High Court – Kerala High Court is in better position to take track of progress in investigation and also consider the evidence recorded – Case can be transferred only on reasonable apprehension that justice will not be done – Mere apprehension of the accused being influential may not be sufficient – Difficulty or inconvenience in pursuing the case at distant place also not sufficient for transfer of a case – Kerala State Legal Services Authority requested to nominate a senior counsel to represent the petitioner in the matters before the High Court. (Para 6)

       (b) Criminal investigation – Transfer of case to CBI – Constitution of India – Article 32/226 – Power to transfer investigation must be exercised rarely in exceptional circumstances – Would be justified when there is lack of confidence in the investigating agency or in the national interest and for doing complete justice in the matter – Instantly the state police better equipped to investigate the alleged offence – However, State of Kerala directed to constitute a special team of police officers headed by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police to investigate the matter. (Para 9, 11)

       (2010) 3 SCC 571; (2014) 10 SCC 406; (2014) 11 SCC 527 – Relied upon

       Facts of the case:

       The petitioner got married to Lt. Ravi Kiran Kabdula, a naval officer who was then posted at Kochi, Kerala. The relationship between the petitioner and her husband was not very cordial. On 22.02.2013, the petitioner gave an oral complaint that her husband was withholding her identity card, laptop, mobile phone, original marriage certificate etc. The respondent was called to the police station and directed to handover the belongings to the petitioner. On 04.04.2013, the petitioner lodged a complaint against her husband, her parents-in-law and sister-in-law alleging that they have subjected her to physical and mental cruelty. The petitioner had also levelled charge of sexual abuse against five naval officers and wife of one of the naval officers. Based on her complaint, a case was registered in FIR No.260 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 354, 506 (Part-I) IPC read with Section 34 IPC against the petitioner's husband Lt. Ravi Kiran Kabdula, her parents-in-law, sister-in-law and the said five naval officers and wife of one of them. In the complaint lodged subsequently, the petitioner had made allegations of wife-swapping and also implicated new names. Investigation in the said case is pending with Harbour Police Station, Kochi, Kerala.

       Petitioner's husband had moved an anticipatory bail application before the High Court of Kerala, which was rejected vide order dated 10.06.2013.

       Navy officers shown as accused in FIR No.260 of 2013 and private respondents in these transfer petitions namely, Capt. Ashok K Aukta, Preena Aukta, Lt. Ishwar Chand Vidyasagar, Anand Balakrishnan and Ajay Jaykrishnan have filed petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in Criminal M.C. No. 2551 of 2013, and Criminal M.C. No. 2424 of 2013 before the High Court of Kerala, which the petitioner now seeks to transfer.

       Finding of the Court:

       Case can be transferred only on reasonable apprehension that justice will not be done. Mere apprehension of the accused being influential may not be sufficient. Difficulty or inconvenience in pursuing the case at distant place is also not sufficient for transfer of a case.

       Power to transfer investigation must be exercised rarely in exceptional circumstances.

       Result: Transfer petition dismissed. Writ petition disposed of.