JUDGMENT - BHOSALE D.B., J.:-Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has filed this application under section 407 of Cri.P.C seeking transfer of Sessions Case No. 272 of 1996 from the Court presided over by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shri A.R. Mahajan to any other Sessions Court in Mumbai Division. The application filed by the petitioner seeking transfer under section 408, bearing Misc. Application No. 833 of 2004, has been rejected by the judgment and order dated 16-7-2004 rendered by the Principal Judge of the Court of Sessions for Greater Bombay.

3. According to the petitioner, the conduct of the learned Judge and his attitude towards him, most clearly evidenced by the events of 10-6-04 and 11-6-04, has given rise to a strong and reasonable apprehension in his mind that the learned Sessions Judge is determined to take him into custody on some pretext or the other. In short, according to the petitioner, the conduct of the concerned learned Sessions Judge has resulted in his loosing faith that he would have a fair and unbiased trial at his hands. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that it would not be in the interest of justice nor would it convey an impression that the justice had been done if the trial was to continue before the said learned Sessions Judge.

4. The factual matrix, that would be relevant and material for deciding this application, in brief, is as follows. The petitioner was arrested on 28-8-95 in C.R. No. 495/95 under section 302 of Indian Penal Code for allegedly committing murder of his neighbour. It is the case of the petitioner that since 1977 he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and has been undergoing treatment for his ailment till this date. Under the judicial order, he was shifted to the mental health institution (for short "the said hospital") for treatment where he remained for about five months from 28-10-95 to 21-3-96. The petitioner was granted bail by order dated 5-2-1996 while he was in the said Hospital. The petitioner has specifically mentioned in this application that apart from his appearances before the learned Sessions Judge prior to July, 2003, he has attended ten dates of hearings commencing from 3-7-03 to 1-4-04 in his case. He has further stated that he has diligently attended the Court and never missed a single date of hearing till this date. His family members also used to accompany him to the Court.

It is in this backdrop the case was fixed for recording of evidence on 15-4-2004. His Advocate Prabhakar Vaidya, who was on record till 15-4-2004, introduced the petitioner to one Advocate Santosh Deshpande, who agreed to take the case of the petitioner. He filed his Vakalatnama on 15-4-2004. On 7-6-04, his Advocate Deshpande filed an application, bearing Misc. Application No. 761 of 2004 under section 329 of Cri.P.C., claiming that the petitioner was mentally unfit to stand trial. On that date, for the first time the witnesses were also summoned and they were present and in view thereof the Court directed the petitioner to pay cost to the witnesses and adjourned the matter to 9-6-2004 with direction that he should produce medical certificate in support of his case of mental illness. On 9-6-2004, the matter was adjourned to 10-6-04.

The events of 10-6-04 and 11-6-04, according to the petitioner, gave rise to a strong and reasonable apprehension in the petitioners mind that the concerned learned Judge was determined to take him into custody on some pretext or the other. On 10-6-04, Advocate Deshpande could not appear. However, his assistant. (Advocate Jaiswal), was present in the Court. According to the petitioner, Advocate Jaiswal attempted to submit the medical certificates which the learned Judge refused to accept on the ground that they were not endorsed as true copies and signed by Advocate Deshpande on record. The learned Judge, according to the petitioner, refused to permit Advocate Jaiswal to make submission as he was not an Advocate on recor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document