Section 407 Cr.P.C does not cover the stage of investigation for transferring a case.

1. In the instant application, the petitioner prays for transfer of Ara GRPS UD Case No. 42 of 2007, and Ara G.R.P.S. Case No. 73 of 2007, dated 6.12.2007, from the Court of Railway Magistrate, Ara to relevant court within Patna Sessions Division.

2. The issue involved in this case is whether at the stage of investigation, a case can be transferred from one district to another district, or in other words, from one Sessions Division to another Sessions Division under Section 407 Cr.P.C

3. The prosecution case is as follows; a dead body in a mutilated condition was found on the railway track of Karisath Railway Station, within Ara district. The G.R.P. Ara Railway Station with aid of mobile of deceased found near her dead body, traced the parentage of girl and informed her father, one Birendra Prasad Singh of the incident, who subsequently lodged a report with Ara Rail P.S. on 6.12.2007.

4. In his report, he stated that her daughter Sonu, aged about 20 years, had affairs with one Rajesh Bhardwaj son of this petitioner. They used to regularly talk for hours on phone and mobile. In the night of 30.11.2007 at 10 P.M., the aforesaid Rajesh Bhardwaj took the informants daughter Sonu on his motorcycle from his Patna residence situated at Kankarbagh, which was also witnessed by his domestic servants Baiju and Dharmendra. In course of enquiry, the informant learnt from his brother-in-law Dr. Sanjeev that Sonu called her Mausi, Dr. Anita, at 12.30 A.M. in night of 30.11.2007/1.12.2007 to inform her, that she is going out with Rajesh and will return after marriage. On 1.12.2007 at 7.15 A.M., the GRP, Ara, informed him that the dead body of his daughter is lying on railway track.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, Ara G.R.P.S. Case No. 73 of 2007 dated 6.12.2007, as contained in Annexure- 4 was instituted. Prior to the institution of aforesaid regular case, post mortem of the body was done and U.D. Case bearing no. 42/07, dated 1.12.2007, was registered.

6. The petitioner has sought for transfer of aforesaid case from court at Ara to Patna. In support of his plea, learned counsel submits that under Section 407(1)(c) and 407(1)(c)(ii) of Cr.P.C, the High Court has ample power to transfer a case, even during investigation from one district to another district. According to him Section 407(1)(c) confers power on High Court to transfer a case from one Sessions Division to another Sessions Division, if it tends to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice. He submits that as per Section 407(2), the High Court can transfer a case on its own initiative, also apart from the application of the parties. He submits that the term Case would not essentially refer to a stage of enquiry or trial, but would also cover the stage of investigation. In this respect he relied upon a decision in the case of Prabha Singh vs. Bhanu Prasad, reported in 1949 Patna 105 (Para-7) and a judgment of learned Single Judge of Calcutta High Court in the case of State (CBI) vs. Klichine Aleksandre & Ors., 1996(1) CHN 507.

7. The petitioner states that he has two sons. His elder son Rajan Bhardwaj is employed in Air Deccan and lives with his family at Delhi. He has to take plane all over India and as such the petitioner alone is left to look after and make necessary Pairwi in the case. He further submits that he sustained multi organ failure and was admitted in ICU of Max Hospital Saket, New Delhi. The two Kidneys of the petitioner were also found damaged. His movement has been restricted and confined.

8. He further submits that most of the witnesses are of Patna and it will not prejudice or cause inconvenience to either of the parties, if the case is transferred even at the stage of investigation, from Ara Sessions Division to Patna Sessions Division. He submits that there is no prohibition under statute for transferring a case even at the stage of investigation, from one Sessions Division to another Session