Judicial magistrate Pankaj Garg, accused in a hit-and-run case, died of suspected cardiac arrest in Hoshiarpur after the Supreme Court of India transferred his trial from Punjab to Rohini, Delhi.
PUNJAB: A judicial officer involved in a hit-and-run case, whose trial was recently moved by the Supreme Court from Punjab to Delhi, has passed away in Hoshiarpur district, Punjab. Pankaj Garg, who held the position of a judicial magistrate first class in the Hoshiarpur district court, reportedly died from a suspected cardiac arrest.
Garg was originally from Kalanwali in Haryana’s Sirsa district and was serving in the Punjab judicial services at the time of his death. His passing comes shortly after the Supreme Court ordered the transfer of his trial concerning the alleged hit-and-run incident to a trial court in Rohini, Delhi.
Factual Background
The case stems from a tragic road accident on February 2, 2025, resulting in the death of the complainant’s husband. The deceased was reportedly riding a motorcycle from Hoshiarpur to Phagwara when the accident occurred. It is alleged that a black Creta vehicle, driven by the accused, a probationary judicial officer in Punjab, caused the incident.
This led to the registration of FIR No. 5/2025 at Police Station Rawalpindi, District Kapurthala, citing violations under various sections of the law, including 281, 125(a) and (b), 324(4), and 106(1). The criminal case stemming from this FIR, designated CHI-279-2025, is currently pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Phagwara, Punjab. The petitioner is seeking to transfer this trial from Punjab to Delhi (NCT).
Transfer of the Case
Last October, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi approved a request from the deceased’s family to transfer the trial, citing potential bias due to the accused being a judicial officer. During the proceedings, Garg’s counsel expressed no objection to the transfer, but proposed relocating the case to a Noida court in Uttar Pradesh, given that the victim’s sister-in-law is a practicing advocate in Delhi. However, the Supreme Court directed that the trial be held in a court of an additional chief metropolitan magistrate in the national capital.
Additionally, the Supreme Court transferred another case filed by the victim’s wife requesting a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe, affirming that any necessary further investigations would be carried out by the Delhi Police. A related Motor Accident Claims Tribunal case was also moved from Kullu in Himachal Pradesh to a court in Delhi.
The Court also put a stay on any further proceedings in the trial currently ongoing in the Phagwara Court. Additionally, it directed the petitioner to file an application for the transfer of a related writ petition, noting that both matters should be heard together for consistency.
The petitioner requested the trial’s transfer, citing concerns about obtaining a fair and impartial trial in Punjab due to the accused being a serving judicial officer. According to the petition, the Judicial Magistrate, stationed in Hoshiarpur, was allegedly involved in the accident that resulted in the death of the petitioner’s husband. The trial has progressed to the stage of framing charges in the Phagwara court.
The plea had been mentioned to the Supreme Court the previous day for urgent listing. Counsel for the petitioner informed the bench that the victim had died in the hit-and-run incident, emphasizing the sensitivity of the case due to the accused’s professional position.
During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant specifically asked the petitioner’s counsel about choosing Delhi-NCR as the desired location for the trial transfer, questioning,
“Hit and run…where the accused is a judicial magistrate?”
He sought clarification on why the case shouldn’t instead be moved to Chandigarh and inquired about the identity of the accused magistrate.
At the next hearing, Justice Kant pressed counsel to confirm the seriousness of the request to move the trial to Delhi. Advocate Choudhary indicated that the apprehension arose from the accused magistrate’s family background, noting his connections to Sirsa and relatives who practice law in Chandigarh.
Justice Kant responded,
“We will transfer the case wherever you want in India—no difficulty. But the other eye-witnesses, like the sister of the deceased, will they be able to travel to Delhi?”
Counsel assured the Court that witnesses would indeed be able to appear in Delhi.
Recognizing this, the bench proceeded to issue notice on the transfer petition, leaving the possibility open for the proceedings to be shifted to Delhi. The petition was filed through Advocate-on-Record Rajesh Singh Chauhan.
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE
