MODI, J.—This is a revisional application by the accused Surajmal against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Bharatpur, dated the 13th May, 1953, upholding the conviction of the accused under sec. 323 I.P.C. The accused stands sentenced to two months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default, to a further rigorous imprisonment for one month. A bail application has also been filed on behalf of Surajmal.

2. This application, relating as it does to a case arising in the Jaipur division, should have been filed before the Jaipur Bench of this Court but has instead been filed before this Court at Jodhpur. The important question for determination before me at this stage is whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain it.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that under the arrangements made for disposal of business during the long vacation there is no Judge sitting at Jaipur at the moment and that as vacation Judge I am empowered to dispose of work both relating to the Jodhpur and Jaipur benches and as such I must entertain this application even sitting at Jodhpur as the matter is urgent and does not brook delay. Learned counsel has relied on Rule 63 of the Rules of this Court.

4. I may set out a few salient facts relating to the constitution of, and distribution of work in this High Court in so far as they have a bearing on the decision of the question before me. Soon after the formation of the new State of Rajasthan by a number of stages into which it is not necessary to enter here, a High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan was created and established by and under the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance (No. XV) of 1949. This Ordinance came into force on 29th August, 1949. Sec. 10 of the Ordinance lays down that the High Court shall sit at Jodhpur and such other place or places, if any, as the Rajpramukh may from time to time appoint either permanently or of a specified period. By Notification No. 155/Jd /U.S.R. dated 25th August, 1949, the High Court of Rajasthan was inaugurated at Jodhpur on 29th August, 1949. By a further Notification No. 155-A/Jd./U.S.R. of the same date, His Highness the Rajpramukh directed that until further orders the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan will also sit at Jaipur to dispose of the Work arising at Jaipur and Kotah Divisions. This was followed by a subsequent Notification dated the 7th November, 1952, published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated 22nd November, 1952, whether His Highness the Rajpramukh directed that the words "to dispose of the work arising in the Jaipur and Kotah Divisions" be deleted in the aforesaid Notification No. 155-A of 25th August, 1949, and it was further provided that the necessary allocation of work shall be made by the Chief Justice under sec. 42(2) of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance. Sec. 42(2) of the Ordinance provides inter-alia, that the Chief Justice shall be responsible for the distribution and conduct of the business of the High Court. In exercise of the powers under the above section the Honble Chief Justice by Notification No. 50/Gen dated 26th November, 1952, published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated 6th December, 1952 has directed that (a) all cases arising in the revenue divisions of Bikaner, Jodhpur and Udaipur (except such as may by special order of the Chief Justice be transferred to Jaipur Bench) shall be disposed of by the Court at Jodhpur, and (b) all cases arising in the revenue divisions of Jaipur and Kotah (except such as may by special order of the Chief Justice be transferred to the Court at Jodhpur) shall be disposed of by the Jaipur Bench.

5. It follows from the Notifications set out above that the present case which has arisen in the revenue division of Jaipur can be disposed of only by the Jaipur Bench of this High Court, that is, a Bench sitting at Jaipur unless such case has by special order of the Honble Chief Justice been transferred to the Court at Jodhpur. There is no question of the exception being applicabl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document