1987 Supreme(HP) 28

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
R.S.THAKUR
STATE THROUGH TARA SINGH S/O MANI RAM SINGH, LOCAL SECRETARY, RADHASOAMI SATSANG (BEASJ DALHOUSIC, H.P. - Appellant
Versus
Y.V.MEHRA - Respondent
Cri. Misc. Petition (M.) No. 34 of 1986
Decided On : 05/14/1987

The High Court has complete and exclusive powers over the judicial hierarchy in the State with regard to their administration, superintendence, and control, which includes the power to transfer cases from one court to another. The Chief Justice of the High Court is competent to pass an order of transfer under Rule 1, Chapter 9-A, Vol. V of the High Court Rules and Orders read with section 407 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and it is not necessary that such an order should be passed by a quorum of three Judges. Such an administrative order is not open to challenge by any party to a case under transfer and can even be of omnibus character.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - Section 407 - Transfer of cases - Powers of High Court - Administrative and judicial powers - Order of transfer by Registrar (Vigilance) - Validity - Section 409 - Trial of case - Commencement - Framing of charge - Recall of case by Sessions Judge - Jurisdiction.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a religious denomination, filed a complaint alleging that the respondents trespassed into its land, demolished a structure under construction, and set fire to doors, windows, and timber. The police registered a case and challaned the respondents for various offenses, including arson and mischief. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions, which assigned it to the Additional Sessions Judge (I). However, the High Court subsequently issued an order transferring all criminal cases pertaining to Chamba district, where the incident occurred, from the Additional Sessions Judge (I) to the District and Sessions Judge. The petitioner challenged this order and the subsequent order of the Sessions Judge transferring the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate for trial.

Finding of the Court:

1. The trial of the case had not commenced at the time of the transfer order, as no charge had been framed by the Additional Sessions Judge (I). 2. The High Court has complete and exclusive powers over the judicial hierarchy in the State with regard to their administration, superintendence, and control, which includes the power to transfer cases from one court to another. 3. The Chief Justice of the High Court is competent to pass an order of transfer under Rule 1, Chapter 9-A, Vol. V of the High Court Rules and Orders read with section 407 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and it is not necessary that such an order should be passed by a quorum of three Judges. 4. Such an administrative order is not open to challenge by any party to a case under transfer and can even be of omnibus character. 5. The order of transfer by the Registrar (Vigilance) was valid as it was issued with the prior approval of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice. 6. The Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to recall the case to his file after the transfer order, as the provisions of section 409 of the Criminal Procedure Code do not apply to cases where the trial has not commenced. 7. The Sessions Judge's order transferring the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate was valid as he had considered the record of the case and found that no prima facie case was made out against the respondents under sections 436 and 450 of the Indian Penal Code, which were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

Issues: 1. Whether the trial of the case had commenced at the time of the transfer order. 2. Whether the High Court has the power to transfer cases from one court to another. 3. Whether the Chief Justice of the High Court can pass an order of transfer alone or whether it requires a quorum of three Judges. 4. Whether an administrative order of transfer is open to challenge by a party to a case under transfer. 5. Whether the order of transfer by the Registrar (Vigilance) was valid. 6. Whether the Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to recall the case to his file after the transfer order. 7. Whether the Sessions Judge's order transferring the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate was valid.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The trial of a case commences when the charge is framed and the plea of the accused is taken. 2. The High Court has complete and exclusive powers over the judicial hierarchy in the State with regard to their administration, superintendence, and control, which includes the power to transfer cases from one court to another. 3. The Chief Justice of the High Court is competent to pass an order of transfer under Rule 1, Chapter 9-A, Vol. V of the High Court Rules and Orders read with section 407 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and it is not necessary that such an order should be passed by a quorum of three Judges. 4. Such an administrative order is not open to challenge by any party to a case under transfer and can even be of omnibus character. 5. The order of transfer by the Registrar (Vigilance) was valid as it was issued with the prior approval of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice. 6. The Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to recall the case to his file after the transfer order, as the provisions of section 409 of the Criminal Procedure Code do not apply to cases where the trial has not commenced. 7. The Sessions Judge's order transferring the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate was valid as he had considered the record of the case and found that no prima facie case was made out against the respondents under sections 436 and 450 of the Indian Penal Code, which were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the record of the lower court was remitted to the Court concerned for disposal in accordance with law.