Chief Judicial Magistrate lacks jurisdiction to transfer criminal cases; such authority exclusively belongs to the Sessions Judge under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

JUDGMENT :

TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under section 528 BNSS to quash/set aside impugned Transfer Order dated 10.10.2025 passed by learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow whereby, trial of the Criminal Case No. 6148/2022 State vs. Bijendra Pal Singh and others has been transferred from the court of Judicial Magistrate 1st (A.T.S.), Lucknow to the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st, Lucknow.

Factual Matrix

2. Shorn of the details, an FIR lodged against opposite party no.2 Bijendra Pal Singh and opposite party no.3 Rajiv Singh alleging fraudulent misappropriation of gold jewellery worth approximately 3,20,00,000/- on 02.09.2021, registered as Case Crime No. 219 of 2021 under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 IPC, with Sections 170, 467, 468, 471 and 411 IPC added during investigation. On 03.09.2021, the police arrested opposite party no.3 Rajiv Singh and recovered 5 kg 743 gm 90 mg of gold jewellery belonging to the informant firm M/s Mohan Shyam Kalyan Das Jewellers (MJK), along with a forged identity card purporting to be that of an IPS officer. The seized jewellery was released in favour of the informant on 05.10.2021. Subsequent applications moved by opposite party no.3 for recall of the release order were rejected on 29.01.2022, against which he filed Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 1667 of 2022 before this Court challenging the orders dated 05.10.2021 and 29.01.2022. Meanwhile, the police filed charge sheet on 22.01.2022 and cognizance was taken by the trial court on 08.02.2022.

3. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, opposite party no.2 and 3 moved an application for transfer of the case from the court of Judicial Magistrate First class (ATS) Lucknow to any other court before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Lucknow, which was rejected by the learned court of Session Judge Lucknow. The opposite party no. 3 preferred an application thereupon the learned trial court which was partially allowed in favour of the accused person and directed to take back the jewellery from the applicant and deposit the same in Malkhana Police Station. Another transfer application was submitted by opposite party no. 2 and 3 before CJM. The learned CJM Lucknow sought a report from the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (ATS) Lucknow where, the trial of the criminal case no. 6148/2022 was pending. On 09.10.2025, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (ATS) Lucknow had submitted the report. After considering the report, the learned CJM Lucknow passed the order dated 10.10.2025 by which the trial of the criminal case was transferred.

Submission on Behalf of the Applicant

4. At the very outset, Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the power of transfer of cases from one Judicial Magistrate to another Judicial Magistrate vest with Sessions Judge only. Section 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (corresponding Section 448 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) exclusively deals with the transfer of criminal cases on the request of an interested party. The said provision confers such power only upon the Sessions Judge, and no equivalent power of transfer is vested in the Chief Judicial Magistrate under the law.

5. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, acted beyond the scope of jurisdiction in entertaining and allowing the transfer application, rendering the impugned order wholly illegal and unsustainable. The applicant relied upon the judgement of case Radhey Shyam and Another vs. State of U.P. 1984 SCC OnLine