Allahabad Aug 27(ILNS): The Allahabad High Court on Thursday while dismissing a transfer application moved under Section 407 of the Cr.P.C, observed that seeking the transfer of criminal trial at the drop of a hat is not recognized by the courts or by any tenant of law.
A Single Bench comprised of Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan passed this order while hearing a petition U/S 407 CR.P.C. filed by Pramod Kumar Tiwari @ Lota Tiwari.
The Application has been moved by the applicant with a prayer to set aside the order dated July 20, 2021, passed by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Transfer Application, Pramod Kumar Tewari alias Lota Tiwari v. State of U.P. pertaining to arising out of the case under Sections 147, 148, 149,452, 302, 307, 504, 506, 120-B/34 I.P.C. P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh, whereby the request of the applicant to transfer the above-mentioned case to some other court from the court where the same is pending has been rejected, with a further prayer to transfer the above case to any other Court of the same Judgeship.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that on March 20, 2021, the applicant had overheard a conversation between the public prosecutor and the Presiding Officer of the Court and the prosecutor was informing the Presiding Officer of the court that the file has been transferred to his court keeping in view his reputation and he (Public Prosecutor) is having all the hope that the Presiding Officer would convict and sentence the accused persons with the maximum imprisonment.
It is also stated that on April 3, 2021, the Advocates were not appearing in the courts in pursuance of the resolution of the Bar but the Presiding Officer of the court was in a hurry to hear the arguments of the case and this shows that the public prosecutor has colluded with the informant and, therefore, is impressing upon the Presiding Officer of the court to convict and sentence the applicant.
It is also submitted that the applicant is not having any hope that he will get justice from the court where the case is pending and the same may be transferred to any other court of the same Judgeship.
Additional Government Advocate submitted that transfer of a criminal case is a serious matter and it is not for a party to choose his forum for adjudication of the dispute and, therefore, the application is not having any substance and the same be rejected.
Ashok Kumar Srivastava, Counsel appearing for respondents vehemently submitted that the applicant is in a habit of moving transfer applications and in the past also the transfer applications have been moved by the accused persons of the case and the ground is not such on the basis of which the case can be transferred.
“Having heard counsel for parties and having perused the record it is evident that when the application for transfer of the case was moved to the Sessions Judge, the arguments have been completed on behalf of one accused as is apparent from the report which was sent by the Presiding Officer of the court to the Sessions Judge which has also been quoted in the order of the Sessions Judge”, the Court observed.
It is also apparent that the Sessions Judge while rejecting the application of the applicant has categorically opined that the Presiding Officer has vehemently denied the charges leveled against him and has also stated in his report that the same case was previously fixed for judgment in the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh on April 15, 202, however, the judgment could not be passed and thereafter the case has been transferred to the court of Special Judge, POCSO Act, Pratapgarh, the Court noted.
The Court said that, in the case, the Court is disposed to think that apprehension which has been made the basis to seek an order for transfer of the case pending before the court below is absolutely weak and cannot be remotely said to be reasonable.
The Court further observed that having regard to the grounds on which the transfer application has been moved, as well as the law placed above, in the considered opinion of the Court are not sufficient to exercise the jurisdiction for the transfer of the case from the Court where the same is pending.
“For the reasons recorded hereinabove, I do not find any substance in the application under Section 407 Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant and, therefore, the same is dismissed.
However, as the case is pending for long for disposal, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the above case and conclude the same at the earliest without providing soft adjournments to the parties”, the Court ordered./ILNS/AP/SNG