Court No. - 50
Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 227 of 2018 Applicant :- Shakeel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Farooque Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri M.F. Ansari, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The application has been moved for transferring the S.T. No.269 of 2018, Case Crime No.938 of 2017 (State Vs. Shakeel and others), under sections 302/34, 120-B IPC, P.S. Banna Devi, District Aligarh pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Aligarh from District Aligarh to adjoining district for fair and impartial trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that vide order dated 24.4.2018, C.J.M., Aligarh committed the case to sessions fixing 8.5.2018 and on 8.5.2018 learned Sessions Judge, without passing any order on the application for adjournment moved by applicant-accused, framed the charges under sections 120-B and 302/34 IPC; that the Presiding Officer of the Court of Sessions Judge, Aligarh was earlier posted in the district, as Railway Magistrate and have close relations with local residents particularly informant, because of which without granting adjournment, charges were framed.
Per contra, learned AGA submits that the allegations about alleged relationship are absolutely false and vague; that the charges have been framed after hearing counsel for all the accused-persons, as is clear from the order under section 228 Cr.P.C. at page 41 Annexure No.6; that in any case, there is no ground for transferring the trial to some other district and the accused may have moved application for transfer of the trial before the Sessions Judge for transferring it to some Additional Sessions Judge.
Upon hearing parties counsel and perusal of record, I find that the allegations about relationship in para 8 of the affidavit given in support of transfer application are vague in nature and this may not be sufficient ground for transferring the trial outside Aligarh to some other adjoining district. In case of transfer, great inconvenience will be caused to prosecution witness and in any case, if the accused-applicant has any grievance against the present Presiding Officer of the Court of Sessions Judge, Aligarh, he could have moved application under section 408 Cr.P.C. for transfer of the trial to the Court of some other Additional Sessions Judge. It is also pertinent to mention that application for transfer of sessions trial outside the district by one out of four accused, without impleading the other accused, is legally not maintainable.
In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that the applicant has failed to show that its transfer will tend to general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient in the interest of justice. The application has no force and is liable to be dismissed.
The transfer application is dismissed, accordingly.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Tamang