CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) Baljeet Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ......Respondent 1. Date when Order / Judgment was reserved 19.08.2026 2. Date of Decision / pronouncement of Order / Judgment 03.09.2026 3. Date of uploading Order / Judgment 03.09.2026 4. Whether operative part or full Order / Judgment is pronounced FULL 5. Delay, if any, in pronouncing of full Order / Judgment, and reasons thereof NOT APPLICABLE 6. Whether Speaking/Reasoned YES/NO 7. Whether Reportable YES/NO CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Himmat Singh Sidhu, Advocate, and Mr. Arjun Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Prince Pal, Advocate, for Mr. Imaan Singh Khara, Advocate, for the Complainant. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. Petitioners, namely, (1) Baljeet Singh s/o Mohinder Singh; (2) Rajveer Singh s/o Thana Singh; (3) Sukhmander Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh; (4) Kuldeep Singh s/o Sadhu Singh; (5) Jatinderveer Singh s/o Mohan Lal; (6) Sadhu Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh; and (7) Amarjit Singh Beldar s/o Bhag Singh, have filed this petition under Section 407 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking transfer of case bearing CHI No. 4/2019, JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 2 titled as “State of Punjab v. Baljeet Singh and others”, arising out of FIR No. 86, dated 21.06.2026, under Sections 295-A and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Dayalpura, District Bathinda, which is pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Phul, District Bathinda, to the Court of competent Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh. 2. Few facts relevant for the decision of present petition are that on 21.06.2018, when a police party headed by Inspector Jasvir Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station, Dayalpura, were present in Government Vehicle No. PB-03W-5988, at Main Chowk, Bhagta Bhaika, complainant Jagmohan Singh Granthi s/o Sant Singh, Caste Jatt Sikh, resident of Bhagta Bhaika, along with Phuman Singh, Member, SGPC, Bhagta Bhaika, came there and said Jagmohan Singh Granthi got recorded his statement that: “......he is Amritdhari Sikh and is being appointed as Granthi by SGPC at 6th and 10th Patshahi Bhutan Wala Khuan Bhagta Bhaika. Today, at about 05:00 a.m. in the morning, when I was present in the Gurudwara premises, at that time, Gurdarshan Kaur wife of Sikander Singh resident of Bhagta Bhuika came present and told me that about 50/52 parts of 5th Granthi of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are lying spread in the gali in front of house of Harpal Singh Khaira son of Gurdev Singh Jatt, resident of Bhagta Bhaika and the same are of different salokas. On hearing the same, I became astonished and thereafter, I along with Sangat rushed to the spot and gathered total 51 parts of 5th Granthi with due humanity and thereafter I along with Phuman Singh, Member SGPC, Sukhmander Singh alias Bhola son of Karnail Singh, residents of Bhagta Bahyaka, Inder Singh, Sewadar etc. put the said parts of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in Damdama Sahib Talwandi Sabho and a photocopy of the same is being reproduced to you. Some unknown persons with a view to cause harm to our religious sentiments have done so. Strict legal action should be taken against those unknown persons. ......” On the basis of said statement, FIR No. 86, dated 21.06.20216, under Section 295-A and 120-B IPC was registered at Police Station Dayalpura, against some unknown persons and investigation was commenced by the police. 3. On 11.11.2018, complainant Jagmohan Singh Granthi got recorded his supplementary statement that after inquiring that matter at his own level, he learnt that the said act of desecration was committed by JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 3 Shinderpal Singh Mistri son of Bikkar Singh, Baljit Singh s/o Mohinder Singh, Rajvir Singh son of Thana Singh, Sukhmander Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh, Kuldeep Singh s/o Sadhu Singh, Sadhu Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh, Jatindervir @ Jimmi Arora s/o Mohan Lal, and Amarjit Singh Baildar s/o Bhag Singh, since they are followers of Dera Singh and against Sikh Communism. Ram Rahim, head of Dera Sacha Sauda has also worn the dress of Sri Guru Gobind Singh and gave naamdaan to the public, and the said act was strongly opposed by Sikh Communism. The followers of Dera, with a view to take revenge of the same have committed desecration while spreading the parts of 5th Granthi and thereby caused harm to the religious sentiments of Sikh Communism. 4. On the basis of said supplementary statement, aforementioned persons were arrayed as accused, vide DDR No. 29, dated 11.11.2018. After completion of investigation, final report was filed on 03.01.2019 in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Phul and charges were framed vide order dated 05.02.2020. The trial is now pending adjudication for prosecution evidence. 5. The petitioners herein had filed Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 458 of 2019, before Hon’ble Apex Court, seeking transfer of CHI No. 4/2019, arising out of FIR No. 86/2016, dated 21.06.2016, Police Station Dayalpura, District Bathinda. The said transfer petition alongwith Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 452, 459, 460, 461 and 462 of 2019, wherein also prayer of transfer of trial of criminal cases pending before the Courts at Bathinda, Moga and Faridkot districts to competent Court in Delhi or to any nearby State, out of Punjab, was made, came up for consideration on 25.11.2020 (Annexure P-4), and Hon’ble Single Judge of the Apex Court dismissed the same. The detail of other cases, which were sought to be transferred by way of Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 452, 459, 460, 461 and 462 of 2019, as available in para No. 7 of the judgment dated 25.11.2020 (Annexure P-4), passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge of the Apex Court, is reproduced as under:- JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 4 Sr. No. Details of TP (Crl.) Case No. FIR Details 1. TP (Crl.) No. 452/2019 Jatinderveer Arora & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab CHI No. 3/2019 FIR No. 161/2015 dt. 20.10.2015 PS Dayalpura, Dist.- Bathinda 2. TP (Crl.) No. 459/2019 Prithvi Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab CHI No. 84/2019 FIR No. 79/2015 dt. 04.11.2015 PS Samalsar, Dist.- Moga 3. TP (Crl.) No. 460/2019 Baljit Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab CHI No. 6/2019 FIR No. 98/2016 dt. 03.07.2016 PS Dayalpura, Dist.- Bathinda 4. TP (Crl.) No. 461/2019 Baljit Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab CHI No. 5/2019 FIR No. 89/2016 dt. 29.06.2016 PS Dayalpura, Dist.- Bathinda 5. TP (Crl.) No. 462/2019 Sukhwinder Singh @ Sunny & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab SC No. 67/2019 FIR No. 89/2018 dt. 13.06.2018 PS City Kotkapura Dist.- Faridkot 6. Thereafter, another set of transfer petitions, i.e. Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 284 of 2020, 286 of 2020, 798 of 2022 and 801 of 2022, were filed by several accused persons, who were implicated in such and similar FIRs, as in the present case, pertaining to Faridkot and Moga districts. The allegations against the petitioners/accused persons in said transfer petitions relate to a series of incidents involving desecration of the Guru Granth Saheb Ji and in some cases, allegations including vandalism and destruction of public property. Vide judgement dated 28.02.2023 (Annexure P-6), Hon’ble Division Bench of the Apex Court allowed the said transfer petitions. 7. Another set of transfer petitions, i.e. Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 377, 380, 378, 382, 381, 384-386, all of 2023, were also filed before the Hon’ble Apex Court. However, in these cases transfer of the subject-case was asked from the Court subordinate to the Punjab and Haryana High Court to another Court having the same status, i.e. subordinate to the Punjab and Haryana High Court, whereas in the earlier JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 5 transfer petitions transfer of the respective cases was sought to a Court of competent jurisdiction in Delhi, outside the State of Punjab. The aforementioned transfer petitions were disposed of vide order dated 04.01.2024 (Annexure P-7), and the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court, made in Transfer Petition (Criminal) 377 of 2023, are reproduced as under:- “ The prayer of the petitioners in Transfer Petition(Criminal) No. 377 of 2023 is for transfer of a proceeding registered as CHI No. 5 of 2019, titled as “State of Punjab Vs. Baljeet Singh & Ors.”(subject-case), pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Phul, District Bathinda, Punjab to the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Criminal Courts, Chandigarh. Mr. Basant, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners has relied on an earlier judgment of this Court transferring a batch of cases containing allegations similar to the one which forms the basis of the aforesaid case. The said judgment was delivered on 28th February, 2023 in Transfer Petition (criminal) No. 284 of 2020, which was heard along with three other transfer petitions. But in the set of petitions in which the aforesaid judgment was delivered, the petitioners sought transfer of the respective cases to a Court of Competent Jurisdiction in Delhi, outside the State of Punjab. In the present petition, transfer of the subject-case is asked for from a Court subordinate to the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh to another Court having the same status, i.e. subordinate to the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In our opinion, the petitioners ought to apply before the jurisdictional High Court in terms of Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the reliefs claimed in this petition. The present petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation. We also make it clear that if such an application is made before it, the High Court shall apply its mind independently in such petition for transfer and not be influenced by any earlier order passed, before the aforesaid judgment was delivered by this Court.” Remaining transfer petitions were also disposed of in terms of the order passed in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 377 of 2023, granting JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 6 liberty to the petitioners therein to approach the Punjab and Haryana High Court, for transfer of the respective cases/appeals. 8. Basing the judgment and order dated 28.02.2023 (Annexure P-6) and 04.01.2024 (Annexure P-7), passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, number of petitions, namely, CRM-M-2770, 4757, 5005, 5611, 5014, 24794, 24813, all of 2024, involving similar set of facts and identical question of law, as are involved in the present case, were filed before this High Court (Punjab and Haryana High Court). All the aforementioned petitions came up for consideration before the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Sandeep Moudgil, J.), and the following question was formulated: “Whether the facts and circumstances involved herein warrant for this Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 407 Cr.P.C., to transfer the trial from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Phul, District Bathinda to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh.” After noticing the factual matrix, legal provisions, and settled proposition of law in extenso, Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in para Nos. 48 to 52 of its detailed judgment dated 17.03.2025, passed in CRM-M-2770- 2024, titled as “Baljit Singh and others v. State of Punjab”, observed as under:- “48. Coming back to the bunch of cases in hand, the petitioners have highlighted instance like murder of Manohar Lal who was father of one accused Jatinderveer Arora in FIR No.161 of 2015 and FIR No.86 of 2016 followed by murder of Pardeep Kumar accused in FIR No.63 of 2015 and the trial of this case has already been transferred. 49. Another instance of attempt of murder of Shakti Singh accused in FIR No.89 of 2018 has also been highlighted pointing out that the environment in the Punjab is surcharged after the sacrilege case. 50. A free and fair trial is an important facet of Article 21 of the Constitution even as it forms the foundation of criminal jurisprudence. Fairness of a trial can only be ensured if the process from investigation to conviction is not tainted with bias for or against the accused or the victim. The nature of the criminal justice system in Bharat is such that the involvement of executive in the investigation and prosecution process paves the way for bias in the trial proceedings leaving JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 7 a vacuum for tampering of evidence and witnesses being intimidated and put in danger are extremely high. This demands for a fair adjudication and independent trial to be conducted in an environment which is free from such abuses and excesses. 51. Taking into account the above-discussion based on submissions of respective all stake-holders, the material before this Court, the circumstances prevailing and also considering the fact that the identical petitions involving sacrilege has been ordered to be transferred to UT Chandigarh, there is no reason for this Court to reject the petitions. 52. The trial of the present cases is ordered to be transferred to the competent Court at UT Chandigarh moreso when the FIRs are interconnected and that being so, moving of the trial to a particular place would only facilitate the fair, transparent and free from fear trial proceedings.” It is also worthwhile to notice that out of total six cases which have been ordered to be transferred to the competent Court at UT Chandigarh, vide judgement dated 17.03.2025 (supra), as per detail given in para No. 53 of the said judgment, following three cases pertain to Police Station Dayalpura, District Bathinda:- “a. CRM-M 2770/2024-Baljeet Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab FIR No.98 of 2016 has been registered at P.S. Dayalpura, District Bathinda and trial in CHI/6/2019 is still pending in the Court of JMIC, Phul, District Bathinda, Punjab is transferred to the Competent Court of jurisdiction to try the said offences at Union Territory Chandigarh. b. CRM-M 5611/2024-Jatindervir Arora & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab FIR No.161 of 2015 registered at P.S. Dayalpura, District Bathinda and trial in CHI/3/2019 is still pending in the Court of JMIC, Phul, District Bathinda, Punjab is transferred to the Competent Court of jurisdiction to try the said offences at Union Territory Chandigarh. c. CRM-M 5014/2024-Baljeet Singy & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab FIR No.89 of 2016 registered at P.S. Dayalpura, Bathinda and trial in CHI/5/2019 is still pending in the Court of JMIC, Phul, District Bathinda, Punjab, is transferred to the Competent JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 8 Court of jurisdiction to try the said offences at Union Territory Chandigarh. It is apposite to notice here that CRM-M-5611-2024, CRM-M- 4757-2024, CRM-M-2770-2024, CRM-M-5014-2024 and CRM-M-5005- 2024, under Section 407 Cr.P.C., which came up for consideration before the Co-ordination Bench of this Court, were, in fact, preferred by same petitioner(s), who had earlier approached the Hon’ble Apex Court by filing Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 452, 459, 460, 461 and 462 of 2019. 9. The judgment dated 17.03.2025 (supra), passed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court was assailed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos. 13591-13592/2025, and the same have been dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, vide order dated 23.01.2026. 10. As per own admission, made in para No. 2 of the petition, the petitioners had filed Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 458 of 2019, which was dismissed vide order dated 25.11.2020 (Annexure P-4), passed by the Hon’ble Single Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court. Thus, the prime question that arises for consideration is whether the present petition would be maintainable or not. 11. From reading of the judgment dated 25.11.2020 (Annexure P-4), it comes out that the prayer made in Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 452, 459, 458, 461, 460 and 462, all of 2019, which were dismissed, was for transfer of trial of criminal cases pending before the courts at Bathinda, Moga and Faridkot districts to competent Court in Delhi or to any nearby State, out of Punjab. After encapsulating the factual position and rival contentions, his Lordship of Hon’ble Apex Court observed thus:- “18. From the available material, this Court cannot reasonably conclude that the situation in Punjab is not conducive for a fair trial for the petitioners. The few instances mentioned by the petitioners’ counsel may suggest heightened feelings amongst different groups but they do not in my estimation, call for transfer of proceedings to another State. 19. Moreover, it cannot just be the convenience of the petitioner but also of the Complainant, the Witnesses, the Prosecution. The larger issue of trial normally being conducted by the jurisdictional Court must also weigh on the issue. When JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 9 relative convenience and difficulties of all the parties involved in the process are taken into account, the conclusion is inevitable that no credible case for transfer of trial to alternative venues outside the State of Punjab is made out, in the present matters. 20. The final submission of Petitioners’ counsel was that, if the Trials cannot be shifted to Delhi, they should be shifted to Chandigarh. This was not the pleaded case of the Petitioners. The suggested alternate venue is Punjab’s capital and even though Chandigarh is an Union Territory, the population pattern in the city is like the rest of Punjab. Such alternative plea on the grounds pleaded in these matters cannot therefore be countenanced. 21. The transfer of trial from one state to another would inevitably reflect on the credibility of the State’s judiciary. Except for compelling factors and clear situation of deprivation of fair justice, the transfer power should not be invoked. The present bunch of cases are not perceived to be amongst such exceptional categories. 22. For the above reasons, these cases are found devoid of merit. Nonetheless, the State as assured to this Court, must make all arrangement to ensure safe conduct of proceedings at the trial courts and also provide adequate security to the petitioners and their associates as might be warranted from the security perspective. It is however made clear that the observations in this judgment are only for disposal of these petitions and should have no bearing for any other purpose. 23. Subject to the aforesaid cautionary observation, the cases are dismissed.” Subsequently, when the above reproduced view point of the Hon’ble Singh Bench of Apex Court, was brought to the notice of Hon’ble Division Bench of Apex Court, in another set of transfer petitions, i.e. Transfer Petition (Criminal) Nos. 284 of 2020, 286 of 2020, 798 of 2022 and 801 of 2022, vide judgment dated 28.02.2023 (Annexure P-6), it was held as under:- “ Main apprehension of the petitioners, as urged by Mr. Ranjit Kumar and Mr. R. Basant, learned Senior Counsel essentially relates to their own safety as also the safety and security of their witnesses. It has been pointed out on behalf of the petitioners that two accused persons and another individual, being father of an accused person have been killed and another accused was attacked in his own house. Primarily JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 10 for these reasons, the petitioners want further proceedings in these cases to be conducted out of the State of Punjab. At present, these cases are pending at the District Courts of Moga and Faridkot, Punjab. Mr. Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-State has opposed the petitioners’ plea seeking transfer of these cases outside the State of Punjab. He has drawn our attention to a judgment passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 25th November 2020 in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No.452 of 2019 by which plea of certain accused persons, against whom allegations were of similar nature, was rejected by this Court. Mr. Divan has laid stress on the fact that apart from the general convenience of running a trial in the jurisdictional Court, transfer of these cases might have adverse impact and demoralising effect on the judiciary including the law enforcement agencies of the State. In fact, this was one of the factors which was considered by the learned Judge while rejecting the transfer petition(s) by the judgment delivered on 25th November 2020. We are, however, apprised by the learned counsel for the petitioners out of the four incidents to which our attention has been drawn, two incidents had taken place after the said judgment was delivered. Under these circumstances, the apprehension of the petitioners cannot be rejected outright as being unfounded and taking an overall view of the petitioners’ plea, in our opinion, it would be expedient for the ends of justice if the cases are transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction within the Union Territory of Chandigarh. We have taken this view upon considering the judgment of the learned Single Judge delivered on 25th November 2020. But in that judgment, one of the factors which was weighed by the learned Single Judge was that with passage of time, the atmosphere ought to have mellowed down. In the cases before the learned Single Judge, the incidents were of 2015. Same is the year of incident before us as well, but as it has been submitted before us, persons accused in such offences had faced assault after the said judgment was delivered. We make it clear, however, that the reason for passing this order is solely based on apprehension of safety and security of the petitioners, who are accused persons, as well as the defence witnesses and this order of transfer must not be construed to cast any doubt or aspersion on impartiality of the concerned Court or any lapse or deficiency of the law enforcement agency. JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 11 We, accordingly, allow these transfer petitions and request the learned Chief Justice of High Court of Punjab and Haryana to allocate the cases to an appropriate Court within the Union Territory of Chandigarh. As the cases are being transferred from the Courts of the State of Punjab to Courts subordinate to the same High Court, we invoke our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to effect transfer of these cases. We accordingly direct that cases registered as:- (a) CHI/178/2020 titled “State v. Randeep Singh alias Neela & Ors.” arising out of FIR No.63/2015 dt. 02.06.2015 registered at P.S. Bajakhana, district Faridkot pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Faridkot, Punjab. (b) SC/170/2018 titled “State v. Mohinderpal @ Bittu & Ors.” arising out of FIR No.33/2011 dt.07.03.2011 registered at P.S. City Moga, district Moga pending in the Additional Sessions Court, Moga, Punjab. (c) CHI/284/2021 titled “State v. Sukhjinder Singh & Ors.” arising out of FIR No.117/2015 dt.25.09.2015 registered at P.S. Bajakhana, district Faridkot pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot, Punjab. (d) CHI/275/2021 titled “State v. Sukhjinder Singh & Ors.” arising out of FIR No.128/2015 dt.12.10.2015 registered at P.S. Bajakhana, district Faridkot pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot, Punjab. be placed before the learned Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana for being allocated to a Court of competent jurisdiction within the Union Territory of Chandigarh.” (emphasis added) 12. In view of the judgment dated 28.02.2023 (Annexure P-6), passed by the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court, as well as the judgement dated 17.03.2025 (supra), passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, which has been upheld upto the Hon’ble Apex Court, this Court is of considered view that the present petition can be entertained by this Court. 13. This Court finds that no indifferent view is possible in the present case, because the petitioners have filed the instant petition, apprehending grave threat to their life and that there are bleak chances that a fair trial is possible in the State of Punjab. The trial of the present case, i.e. JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-4591-2024 (O&M) 12 CHI No. 4/2019, before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Phul, District Bathinda, is stalled since 25.09.2025, pursuant to an interim order passed in the present proceedings. Moreover, trial of other identical cases involving sacrilege, have already been ordered to be transferred to the competent Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh, by the Hon’ble Apex Court, vide judgement dated 28.02.2023 (Annexure P-6), and by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide judgement dated 17.03.2025, passed in CRM-M-2770-2024 (supra) 14. As a result of the above discussion, this petition is allowed. Trial of case bearing CHI No. 4/2019, titled as “State of Punjab v. Baljeet Singh and others”, arising out of FIR No. 86, dated 21.06.2026, under Sections 295-A and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Dayalpura, District Bathinda, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Phul, District Bathinda, is ordered to be transferred to the competent Court at UT Chandigarh. If the trial of already transferred cases is still going on, learned Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, is expected to assign the trial of the present case to the same Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh. 15. Disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE September 03, 2026 Rashmi JAWALA RAM 2026.09.03 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document