JUDGMENT 1. - This is an application under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for transferring Sessions Case No. 17 of 1972, State v. Lala Ram & Ors. pending in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Sikar presided over by Shri Jaskaran Dasani. 2. The brief facts giving rise to this petition are that Shri Kumar Narain, a practising lawyer filed a Civil Suit against the Municipal Council, Sikar and other persons for perpetual injunction in the Court of Munsif, Sikar. This suit was dismissed on 22-9-1980. A second suit was filed by him which was also dismissed on 12-12- 1974. 3. It is alleged that on 15-1-1975 some quarrel resulting in marpeet took place on this disputed way. A report of this incident was lodged by Vinod Kumar son of Kumar Narain at the Police Kotwali, Sikar. In this report as many as 89 persons are alleged to have been involved. After due investigation, the police submitted challan against 14 persons only. Out of these 14 persons three persons are alleged to be absconding, and one is said to have died and the remaining ten persons are facing trial, under section 395, 452 and 147, IPC. This trial is going on before the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar. 4. The contentions of the present accused petitioners are that they have reasonable apprehension in their mind that they will not get fair and equitable trial before the learned Sessions Judge. This trial is going on before the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar. 4. The contentions of the present accused petitioners are that they have reasonable apprehension in their mind that they will not get fair and equitable trial before the learned Sessions Judge. The main contention on which this apprehension has arisen in the mind of the accused petitioners is that in another Sessions Case No. 74 of 1974 the learn, d Sessions Judge, Sikar (Shri Jaskaran Desani) reproduced the contention of the learned Public Prosecutor as under:- " fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd us rdZ fn;k fd vfHk;qDrx.k esa ls dqN fo|kFkhZ gSa ftUgksaus nks ckj vkidh eksVj ?kj ls vkrs oDr dksVZ jkLrs esa jksdh] ipkl&ipkl :i;k izR;sd ij LVs'ku ls ekaxk x;k vkSj fo|kFkhZ ogh gSa ftUgksaus l=g rkjh[k blh eghus dh ?kVuk esa dqN lacaf/kr Fks pkgs og blesa eqyfte u gksa ftUgksusa Jh lqjs'kpUnz eqfUlQ o ,d vU; jktdh; vf/kdkjh Jh vk;Z ds ?kj jkr dks ykfB;ksa ls ekjk] njokts ij Jh vk;Z ds ?kj ds njkokts rksM+ fn;s fQj mUgksaus tekur Jh lh0ts0,e0 dksVZ ls djokyh vkSj ,e0ts0,e0 dksVZ esa buds f[kykQ okjUV fxjQ~rkjh gksrs gq, Hkh nwljs dsl essa ftlesa fo|kFkh vfHk;qDrksa dh t:jr FkhA ,e0ts0,e0 dksVZ ls lh0ts0,e0 dksVZ dks fy[k fn;k FkkA bl ckjs esa fQj Hkh lh0ts0,e0 us bUgsa dLVMh esa Hkstus dh ctk; bl dksVZ esa tekur ij NksM+ fn;k vkSj fQj dqN vfHk;qDrx.k Jh xkSM+ ds ?kj x;s mUgsa xkfy;kWa o vi'kCn dgs vkSj bl eqDn~nes ds dqN eqyfteku us bl U;k;ky; dks Hkh /kedh Hkjk i= fy[kk FkkA bl U;k;ky; dks ,sls i= eqdn~nes esa vkSj Hkh fey pqds gSa fd ?kwal ys yks vkSj dke dj nks ojuk tku ls gkFk /kks cSBksxs iylkuk okys dsl esa vnkyr esa QSlyk lqurs oDr gkFk iSj ca/ks gksus ds ckotwn chM+h lqyxkyhA vnkyr dks tku ls ekjus dh /kedh nh tks Qslys esa fy[kh gqbZ gSA ns'k ds bu gkykr esa ;fn lkfcr vijkf/k;ksa dks U;k;ky; NksM+ nsxk Mj ds rks og dkys fnu tks vHkh dqN fnuksa ifgys chrs gSa muls Hkh cqjs fnu ns'k dks nsxkk Mj ds rks og dkys fnu tks vHkh dqN fnuksa ifgys chrs gSa muls Hkh cqjs fnu ns'k dks ns[kus iM+sxsA iztkrkfU=d yqIr gks tk;sxkA ;g nqHkkZZX; dk fnu gksxkA vnkyr fuMj gksdj U;k; ugha djsxk bUgksaus dgk fd ;g Hkkouk ugha lPpkbZ gS] gdhdr gS] rF; gS ftuls Hkkxk ugha tk;sxkA lkeuk djuk iM+sxk ojuk taxy dk jkt gks tk;sxk] lqj{kk lekIr gks tk;sxhA lk/kkj.k vkneh dh gkyr [kjkc gks tk;sxh xqaMk xnhZ c<+s+xh jkr ds le; esa funksZ"k vkSjrksa o O;fDr;ksa ds lkFk bl rjg O;ogkj djsa Mjk /kedk dj vfHk;qDr NwV tk;s ,slk ugha gksuk pkfg,A vfHk;qDrx.k dh vksj ls dgk x;k fd dksbZ 'kgknr ugha gS muds f[kykQ dkuwuh vr% dksbZ tqeZ Hkh ugha curkA " 5. Mr Tibrewal, learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that in the judgment the learned Sessions Judge has underlined these observations and has tried to give undue importance to the contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor. It was also contended that, though the transfer petition was submitted before this Court, and a notice of the said application had been issued, yet, the learned Sessions Judge showed undue haste in proceeding with the trial of the Sessions Case, though it was pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar for more than three years. 6. The learned Advocate General was heard in this case. As the contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor, which were reproduced in this transfer petition from the judgment in Sessions Case No. 74/1974 raise a serious question of law and order and the safety of the judicial officers, the learned Advocate General contended that if there is a general break in the maintenance of law and order, the Court should take note of it and proceed according to law. 7. Mr. Khan, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State, has contended that the majesty of law and the dignity of the courts have to be maintained by the judicial officer, and they must act in a dispassionate manner in the dispensation of justice. He further contended that even in trying circumstances the judicial officers should keep restraint on themselves and keep in mind cardinal rule of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is to be presumed to be innocent unless proved otherwise. He further contended that no opportunity should be afforded to the accused persons to harbour a bonafide impression that they are not likely to get justice from a particular judicial officer. 8. Mr. Pareek, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant, has opposed the transfer petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Amar Singh v. Sadnu Singh (1) AIR 1925 Lahore 361 : Gurcharan Dass v. State of Rajasthan (2) AIR 1966 SC 1418 and Ram Lal v. Birdhi Lal Sethi (3) 1961 RLW 416. 9. The comments of the learned Sessions Judge were obtained on this transfer petition. He-has contended that a transfer petition was earlier moved before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar presided over by Shri Pyare Mohan Bagerhat a when the case was pending in his Court. The same petition was dismissed on 4-6-1975. 9. The comments of the learned Sessions Judge were obtained on this transfer petition. He-has contended that a transfer petition was earlier moved before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar presided over by Shri Pyare Mohan Bagerhat a when the case was pending in his Court. The same petition was dismissed on 4-6-1975. He was also contended that this case was transferred along with other cases to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge on 31-1-1978. But this request was not approved by the High Court, and the case remained pending in his Court. The observations which have been objected to by the accused petitioners, were nothing, but the reproduction of the contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor. Regarding the allegation of undue haste in disposal of case, he has contended that as this was one-of the oldest case which was lying in his Court, he took steps to complete the same. 10. Respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties have been considered and the record of the case carefully perused. 11. Sessions Case No. 74/1974 was decided by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar (Shri Jaskaran Dasani) on 5-4-1978. A certified copy of this order has been produced. While reproducing the contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor, the learned Sessions Judge underlined all the contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the accused petitioners contends that this has led to a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the accused petitioners that the learned Sessions Judge (Shri Jaskaran Dasani) is biased against them, and that they may not get a just and fair trial at this hands. In Sessions Case No. 74 of 1974, there were nine accused persons. In the present Sessions Case No. 17 of 1975, there are ten accused persons. The present petition for transfer has been filed on behalf of five accused persons only. Out of the present five accused-petitioners Kishan Singh and Hari Singh were accused in the previous trial in Sessions Case No. 74 of 1974 also. In Sessions Case No. 74 of 1974, the learned Public Prosecutor laid great stress on the complete break-down of law and order. Out of the present five accused-petitioners Kishan Singh and Hari Singh were accused in the previous trial in Sessions Case No. 74 of 1974 also. In Sessions Case No. 74 of 1974, the learned Public Prosecutor laid great stress on the complete break-down of law and order. It was contended by him that even the car of the Sessions Judge was stopped on the road by some of these accused persons It is also contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that the house of the Munsif-Magistrate was attacked in the dead of Night and his doors were seriously damaged. It was further contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that threatening letters have been received by the learned Sessions Judge of dire consequences. One of the accused persons in Sessions Case No. 74 of 1974, though in fetters, is alleged to have misbehaved with the Sessions Judge in the Court also. 12. If the contentions made by the learned Public Prosecutor have any truth, then it exhibits a complete break-down of law and order in the district. It appears that the learned Sessions Judge must have taken note of this deteriorating situation of law and order and, therefore underlined the contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor the learned Sessions s Judge should not have underlined these contentions of the leaned Public Prosecutor, because a judicial officer has to exercise a great restraint on himself also. He was at liberty to have passed any order which the merits of the case demanded , but by underlining these contentions, he showed great anxiety over the break-down of law and order situation, which was, in fact, more concern of the executive and the district administration then of the learned Sessions Judge. But the main question is, whether by merely underlining these contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor a reasonable apprehension has been created in the minds of the accused persons that they will not get a just and fair trial at the hands of the learned Sessions Judge (Shri Jaskaran Dasani). 13. The learned Sessions Judge is also alleged to have received threatening letters and it has been contended that even his car was stopped in the way while he was coming to the Court. Sending of the threatening anonymous letters to the Sessions Judge cannot, but be depreated. This seriously tent amounts to the interference in the administration of justice. 13. The learned Sessions Judge is also alleged to have received threatening letters and it has been contended that even his car was stopped in the way while he was coming to the Court. Sending of the threatening anonymous letters to the Sessions Judge cannot, but be depreated. This seriously tent amounts to the interference in the administration of justice. Similarly, the stoppage of the car of the learned Sessions Judge on the road while he was going to the Court, is also a conduct which can only be highly condemned. 14. In spite of this, the question which has to be decided is, whether in the present set of circumstances the present accused-petitioners have a reasonable apprehension that they will not get a just and fair trial at the hands of the learned Sessions Judge. Having given my most anxious consideration to the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the cardinal rule of criminal jurisprudence that an accused must be treated as an innocent unless otherwise proved, feel that the accused petitioners can have a reasonable apprehension in their mind that they will not get just and fair trial in present sessions trial at the hands of the learned Sessions Judgs Shri Jaskaran Dasani. The function of a judicial Court is not restricted to the administration of justice, but also to create an impression that justice has been administered. 15. For the reasons stated above, the transfer petition filed by the accused-petitioners is accepted and it is hereby directed that the Sessions Case No. 17 of 1975, State v. Lala Ram & others , shall be transferred to the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu for trial according to law. The record of the case, if received, shall be returned immediately. 16. The order dated 4-5-1978 shall stand vacated in consequence of the disposal of the transfer petition. 17. Before parting with this transfer petition, it is hereby directed that a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur who may please take note of deteriorating law and order situation in the district of Sikar with particular reference to the safety of the judicial officers for whom dispensation of justice is becoming increasingly difficult in the face of their personal insecurity.Petition allowed. *******