Chandigarh: In the turn of the sudden event, justice Arvind Singh Sangwan from the Punjab High Court and Haryana on Thursday soaked himself from hearing problems related to the decision statement in the murder of the former manager of the Dera manager Ranjit Singh.
Head of Dera Gurmet Ram Ram is one of the main charges in this case.
“It has come to my notification that I appeared as an advocate on behalf of Ranjit Singh (regarding the trial of his murder, this petition emerged) and his father late Joginder Singh, Sarpanch, in 2002 civilian litigation in Kurukshetra in 1986-1988.
Let the case be listed In front of several other benches, after getting the appropriate order of the main justice, “Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan observed while researching himself from hearing the case on Thursday on Thursday.
This problem will go to the chairman of the Judge Ravi Shanker Jha, who will refer to it to another suitable bench to hear.
Until then, living on a statement verdict by a special CBI court, Panchkula will continue.
Sangwan justice has heard the problem twice until now.
On August 24, he had detained a special CBI court, Panchkula from saying the verdict in this case and had been looking for comments from the Special CBI Judge Sushil Kumar Garg in his defense questioning his functions.
On August 27, the High Court had received judge comments and asked the other party for this case to submit their reply to the judge’s comments.
When this problem appeared to hear on Thursday, Sangwan justice announced that he referred to a problem to several other benches.
The problem has reached the High Court after the request submitted by Jagseer’s son Ranjit Singh who died, who had been looking for directions to transfer this case to several other CBI judges in Haryana, Punjab, or Chandigarh.
Jagseer, 27, a resident of Khanpur Kolian Village in Kurukshetra District, looking for directions for Transfer of Cases No.
Chi / 1864/2013, titled ‘CBI versus Baba Gurmeet Ram Rasim Singh and other people who are waiting before the Special CBI judge, Panchkula other special CBI courts in Haryana, Punjab or Chandigarh.
According to the Petitioner, he has a reasonable concern that the judge was too influenced by the defendant through respondents No.
2 (Public Prosecutor CBI) who is the CBI public prosecutor in this case but not in this case.
The applicant accused this prosecutor took an undue interest and used an undue influence on special CBI judges, Panchkula.
HC Judge has expressed concern that Sushil Kumar Garg, a special CBI judge, Panchkula, was too influenced by the defendant through the CBI K Singh prosecutor.
The applicant claimed that KP Singh was previously posted with a special judge Sushil Kumar Garg when he posted in Chandigarh and after moving to Panchkula, he had disturbed the administration of justice and influenced the entire process even though there were two other special public prosecutors appointed specifically for the trial.
The request includes accusations that have attended the court even on Saturdays, which are not court working days.