2014 Supreme(Chh) 198
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
M. Mohan Rao – Appellants
Vs.
State of C.G. – Respondent
Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 6 of 2014
Decided On: 23.06.2014
Advocate Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff:Shrawan Agrawal, Advocate
For Respondents/Defendant:Anand Verma, Panel Lawyer and Amiakant Tiwari, Advocate
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 407,177 to 185 and 407(1) - Negotiable Instrument Act – Section 138 - Negotiable Instruments - On a complaint filed by respondent No. 2/complainant - for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act trial Magistrate has taken cognizance and on that date offence under Section 138 of Act was registered against petitioner herein and further directed to issue summons on payment of process fee thereafter, date for appearance was given but later on it has been corrected - Applicant appeared before trial Court, though no summons was issued and received by him, and filed his memo of appearance and on that date, he was released on bail upon furnishing personal bond to satisfaction of trial Court - Thereafter, instant application has been filed by applicant on ground that learned Magistrate has acted arbitrarily and corrected order sheet dated and acting under influence of complainant, he was wrongly made to appear and, therefore, his case be transferred to other Court of Sessions Division - On other hand, learned counsel for respondent No. 2/complainant would submit that petitioner has failed to make out any ground for transfer of his case – Held, Thus, applicant herein appeared before competent jurisdictional criminal court and having filed cannot be allowed to turn around and claimed that he was forcibly made to appear before Court and that cannot be ground to seek transfer of criminal case and applicant has not established any other ground as envisaged under Section 407(1) of Cr.P.C - Apart from this, applicant had remedy to file an application for transfer of a criminal case under Section 410 of Code from one court of Judicial Magistrate to any court of Magistrate, but he did not avail such remedy and directly approached before this Court under Section 407 of Code - Since applicant has failed to make out case for transfer of case within meaning of Section 407 of Code, the transfer petition deserves to be dismissed - Resultantly, transfer application fails and is hereby dismissed - Application dismissed.
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. Invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'), instant transfer petition, seeking transfer from the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg to another competent jurisdictional Court, has been filed by the applicant herein, who is facing trial for the offence punishable under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this petition are as under:-
(2.1) On a complaint filed by respondent No. 2/complainant - Pragyanand Sahu for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (for short "the Act") on 7.8.2013, the trial Magistrate has taken cognizance on 16.09.2003 and on that date offence under Section 138 of the Act was registered against the petitioner herein; and further directed to issue summons on payment of process fee thereafter, the date for appearance was given on 13.12.2013 but later on it has been corrected as 28.09.2013. On 28.9.2013, applicant appeared before the trial Court, though no summons was issued and received by him, and filed his memo of appearance; and on that date, he was released on bail upon furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Thereafter, on 20.2.2014, instant application has been filed by the applicant on the ground that learned Magistrate has acted arbitrarily and corrected the order sheet dated 16.9.2013 and acting under the influence of complainant, he was wrongly made to appear on 28.9.2013 and, therefore, his case be transferred to other Court of Sessions Division, Raipur.
(2.2) On the other hand, Shri Amiakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/complainant would submit that the petitioner has failed to make out any ground for transfer of his case under Section 407 of the Code.
3. In order to decide the instant transfer petition, it would be proper to notice under Section 407 of the Code, which reads as under:-
"407. Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals.--(1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court--
(a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court subordinate thereto, or
(b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise; or
(c) that an order under this section is required by any provision of this Code, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice,
it may order--
(i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified under Sections 177 to 185 (both inclusive), but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offence;
(ii) that any particular case, or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction;
(iii) that any particular case be committed for trial to a Court of Session; or
(iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself.
(2) The High Court may act either on the report of the lower Court, or on the application of a party interested, or on its own initiative;
Provided that no application shall lie to the High Court for transferring a case from one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in the same sessions division, unless an application for such transfer has been made to the Sessions Judge and rejected by him.
(3) Every application for an order under sub-section (1) shall be made by motion, which shall, except when the applicant is the Advocate-General of the State, be supported by affidavit or affirmation.
(4) When such application is made by an accused person, the High Court may direct him to execute a bond, with or without sureties, for the payment of any compensation which the High Court may award under sub-section (7).
(5) Every accused person making such application shall give to the Public Prosecutor notice in writing of the application, together with a copy of the grounds on which