SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(AP) 978

G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
Aijaz Ali Quresh – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants:M. Layeeq Khan, Advocate.
For the Respondents: R2, Public Prosecutor.

Judgment

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. P.C) to set aside order dated 03.5.2012 passed in Transfer Crl.M.P.No.202 of 2012 (Crl. M.P.) on the file of the Court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, transferring C.C.No.725 of 2009 (C.C) on the file of the Court of VIII Additioinal Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, to try and dispose of along with S.C.No.540 of 2011 on the file of the latter Court under Section 408 Cr. P.C.

2. Whereas the petitioners herein are the respondents in the Crl. M.P. and A1 to A8 in the C.C., the second respondent herein is the petitioner in the Crl. M.P. and defacto complainant in the C.C. For convenience sake, I refer the parties as arrayed in the Crl. M.P. from here afterwards.

3. The question raised here is whether by virtue of clause (iii) of Section 407(1)(c) Cr. P.C., the Sessions Judge got authority to transfer the case as was done in this case.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents would contend that by virtue of the said clause under Section 407(1)(c) Cr. P.C., only the High Court got the authority to commit the case to the Court of Session for conducting necessary trial






































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top