B.N.KATJU, R.B.LAL, I.P.SINGH
RADHEY SHYAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent
( 1 ) THE applicants filed an application in this court under Section 407 Criminal Procedure Code for transfer of Sessions Trial No. 210 of 1981 State v Balgovind and others from thet court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad to some other competent court within the same Sessions Divisions. When the aforesaid application was heard by a single Judge a preliminary objection was taken that the application was not maintainable in view of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 407 Criminal Procedure Code. The learned counsel for the applicants, however, contended that as the Sessions Trial was part-heard the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 407 Criminal Procedure Code was inapplicable as the Sessions Judge had no jurisdiction to transfer a part heard Sessions trial under Section 408 Criminal Procedure Code. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the applicants reiled on the Division Bench decision of this Court in State v. 1. Gyan Chand in which it was held:1. Sub-section (I C) of Section 528 Criminal Procedure Code does not confer power on the Sessions Judge to transfer a sessions trial from the file of one Additional Sessions Judge to ano
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.