APARESH KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Petitioner is facing trial in connection with criminal cases arising out of fodder scam of erstwhile State of Bihar before the learned Special Judge-VII, CBI (AHD Scam), Ranchi. Earlier learned Single Judge of this Court had discharged three accused persons the present petitioner, Sajal Chakraborty and Dr. Jagannath Mishra on the ground of their conviction in one of the criminal cases arising out of Fodder Scam applying the provision under Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India and Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the Cr. PC). The petitioner was discharged in connection with the instant case R.C. No. 64A/1996 while Dr. Jagannath Mishra was discharged in 4 cases being R.C. Nos. 64A/96, 47A/96, 68A/96 and 38A/96. On the same ground Sajal Chakraborty was also discharged in two cases being R.C. Nos. 20A/96 and 68A/96. These accused have been convicted in one of the cases for offence involving the same ingredients with respect to Chaibasa Treasury. The State of Jharkhand through SP, CBI went in appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the said judgment being Cr. Appeal No. 394/2017 (in the case of Lalu Prasad @ Lalu Prasad Yadav, the present petitioner), Cr. Appeal No. 393/2017 (in the case of Sajal Chakraborty) and Cr. Appeal No. 395/2017 (in the case of Dr. Jagannath Mishra). The Hon'ble Supreme Court have by the judgment dated 8.8.2017 allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned judgments and orders passed by the High Court and directed the trial Court concerned to expedite the trial and to conclude the same as far as possible within a period of nine months from the date of the judgment. That is why the present petitioner is facing trial in the instant RC No. 64A/96.

2. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to transfer the RC No. 64A/96 case from the Court of learned Special Judge-VII, CBI (AHD) Ranchi Mr. Shiv Pal Singh apprehending that a fair and impartial trial cannot be held an the grounds mentioned in the petition. The present case relates to fraudulent withdrawal from the Deoghar Treasury. It would be pertinent to mention here that besides the instant case petitioner is facing trial in RC No. 68A/1996 before the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI - I (AHD Scam), Ranchi Mr. S.S. Prasad, RC No. 47A/1996 before the learned Court of Special Judge, CBI-III (AHD Scam), Ranchi Mr. Pradeep Kumar and RC No. 38A/1996 before the same Court of Special Judge, CBI-VII (AHD Scam), Ranchi Mr. Shiv Pal Singh.

3. Though the petitioner has alleged in general that the learned Court was not fair to him and put obstacles in his defence, the learned senior counsel far the petitioner Mr. Suresh Singh an the basis of the averments made specifically cited four such instances to substantiate the apprehension of the petitioner that he may not have a fair trial before the learned Judge. The first instance relates to the proceeding dated 29.7.2017 before the learned Court. Shri Sunil Kumar (IPS), D.G.P. Police Academy, Patna, Bihar, who was summoned to appear on 29.7.2017 could not appear on the said date. Though this was also informed to the Court, the learned Court, however, directed stoppage of his salary. The learned Court fixed the date of examination of this witness Sunil Kumar on 10.8.2017. It is alleged that the learned trial Court exceeded jurisdiction and passed an order of withholding the salary in an arbitrary manner since in such a case a fine of Rs. 100/- can only be imposed.

4. The next date for adducing the defence witness was fixed on 3.8.2017. On the next date at 11:00 a.m. the petitioner put his attendance along with two other witnesses namely Shri Mukund Prasad and Shri Kanhaiya Kumar. Annexure-3 is in support thereof. A petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner on the same date stating that due to some urgent official work, this witness could not turn up his deposition earlier. Since today Shri Sunil Kumar is present he may be permitted to