S. C. MOHAPATRA, J. ( 1 ) THESE three applications relate to transfer of three criminal proceedings from courts at Baripada in the district of Mayurbhanj for convenient trial at any Court in Balasore district. Petitioner is accused in all the three prosecutions. ( 2 ) IN Criminal Misc. Case No. 890 of 1987 petitioner and three others and the accused persons, the offence alleged to have been committed are under sections 323, 341 and 586 I. P. C. read with section 34 I. P. C. It has been registered as C. R. Case No. 858 of 1986 in the court of Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Baripada. In Criminal Misc. Case No. 891 of 1980 is in respect of applicant alone where he is to face a trial for an offence under section 290 I. P. C. in U. I. Case No. 1651 of 1986 in the court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Baripada. In Criminal Misc. Case No. 892 of 1987, petitioner alone is the accused against whom allegation has been made for having committed the offence under sections 290 I. P. C. This has been registered as U. I. Case No. 1582 of 1986 in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baripada. ( 3 ) IT is alleged in the applications under section 407 Cr. P. C. that the petitioner was prosecuted for an offence under section 366 read with section 109 I. P. C. earlier where he was acquitted. Thereafter, be issued a notice under section 80 Cr. P. C. against the State as well as Prakash Chandra Misra, the Investigating Officer and has filed Title Suit No. 14 of 1987 in the court of the Sub-Judge, Baripada. Immediately after receipt of the notice under section 80 Cr. P. C. in the month of October, 1986 the three prosecutions have been initiated. Although petitioner is a teacher of High School within half a kilometer from the Police Station where he was regularly attending, he was indicated as absconder for which a Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest was issued against him just to arrest the petitioner. P. C. in the month of October, 1986 the three prosecutions have been initiated. Although petitioner is a teacher of High School within half a kilometer from the Police Station where he was regularly attending, he was indicated as absconder for which a Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest was issued against him just to arrest the petitioner. In the absence of any allegation that the petitioner is likely to flee away or commit any violence, he was produced in court being hand cuffed and tied with a rope which itself indicates that Prakash Chandra Misra was taking revenge on account of filing of the suit for malicious prosecution after his acquittal. In spite of Prakash Chandra Misra being transferred from Baisinga, he has been posted at Baripada. At his instance, petitioner is not getting the correct date of the posting of cases Anti social elements have been engaged to obstruct him from appearing at the Court on the dates fixed. ( 4 ) MR. P. K. Dhal, the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the aforesaid background submitted that the three cases should be transferred to any Court at Balasore or other places. He submitted that Baisinga is forty kilometers from Baripada whereas it is only twenty kilometers from Balasore. Hence, it would be convenient to the witnesses for the prosecution to appear at Balasore and the petitioner can appear conveniently at Balasore for a fair trial. ( 5 ) SECTION 407 Cr. P. C. empowers this Court to transfer prosecution from one Court to the other. Sub- section (1) thereof reads as follows: 407. Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals: (1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court. (a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court Subordinate thereto; or (b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise; or (c) that an order under this section is required by any provision of this Code, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice, it may order. (i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified under sections 177 to 185 (both inclusive), but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offences; (ii) that any particular case or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a Criminal Court Subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court or equal or superior jurisdiction; (iii) that any particular case be committed for trial to a Court of Sessions; or (iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself: ( 6 ) MR. Dhal, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision reported in Alekh Dutta v. Khatramohan Sahu1, where it had been observed: In cases of transfer, the interest not only of the accused, but also of the complainant has to be looted into. There is a general consensus of judicial opinion that in matters of transfer greater emphasis is to be laid on the convenience of the accused rather than of the prosecutor to in the aforesaid decision one of the allegations of the accused was that there was preexisting enmity between the accused and the complainant and that the later would manhandle him through goondas at Bolangir, It was also held that fair and impartial trial scale including a situation created by the complainant gives scope for the accused to entertain a reasonable apprehension that he would not be able to conduct his case effectively. This decision has been referred to in Nabin Chandra Patnaik v. Narendra Mohapatra2, where relying upon the observation of the Supreme Court in Mrs. Menaka Sanjay Gandhi and another v. Miss. Rani Jethmalani3, it was held as in 36 (1970) C. L. T. 1242 (supra) that no hard and fast rule can be laid down as a matter of principle and a balance is to be struck. ( 7 ) WHILE considering the application. I directed the prosecution to file affidavit of the officer against whom allegations have been made in the affidavit as filed, the officer has stated that the investigations in the cases sought to be transferred were made not by him but by another officer and he has no hand in the claimed harassment of the petitioner at Baripada. ( 8 ) IN the background, the facts are to be kept in mind. ( 8 ) IN the background, the facts are to be kept in mind. It is known to the executive government that Baisinga is within 20 kilometers from Balasore, the headquarters of Balasore district and is at a more distance of about 40 kilometers from Baripada the head quarters of Mayurbhanj district. In spite of it, Courts have been established by the State Government at Baripada for trial of offences committed within Baisinga Police Station. Normally, therefore, cases are to be heard at Baripada. In fact, the petitioner had no allegation of absence of fair and impartial trial at Baripada in the prosecution where he was acquitted. Thus, distance alone would not be a factor for transfer of a case. Information of incorrect date by the lawyer is another ground. In case one lawyer gives incorrect date to his client, it would amount to misconduct unless the circumstances leading to the same are explained. Such lawyers can be changed by the petitioner and the difficulty on account of supply of a wrong date can be dealt with by the State Bar Council. All lawyers can not be blamed for the misconduct of one. When the difficulty can easily be eradicated by the accused himself, he cannot put it at a ground for transfer which is an exception to the general rule. The third ground for transfer is the manhandling of the petitioner at Baripada to proceed to Court. Petitioner can take the help of the local police station for his safe arrival in Court premises and for safe return. Maintaining safety of individuals is one of the functions of the police force. In case the request of the petitioner is not respected, the matter can be considered in the circumstances when facts are brought to the Police of the Court Without taking steps no wild allegation should be permitted to be made. No fact also has been brought to my notice to conclude that the local police officers at Baisinga or at Baripada are acting hand in gloves with Prakash Chandra Misra who has been transferred from Baisinga and is posted at Baripada. If Sri Misra is cause of such trouble, petitioner can bring it to the notice of his higher authorities so that on being satisfied that Sri Misra is cause of absence of fair trial of the petitioner can be shifted from Baripada. If Sri Misra is cause of such trouble, petitioner can bring it to the notice of his higher authorities so that on being satisfied that Sri Misra is cause of absence of fair trial of the petitioner can be shifted from Baripada. When petitioner taken all steps and is unable to make it convenient for him to defend himself at Baripada, he may move the appropriate court for transfer bringing all the facts which are to be considered on their own merit. Wild allegation s and misconceived apprehensions should not be given weight by the Court. ( 9 ) LAST ground of transfer is the convenience of the accused and absence of inconvenience for the prosecution if the cases are tried at Balasore. No doubt, justice if available nearer the door would be convenient to the accused. However, legislative intention is that the cases are tried in the Court established for the same. This is to be respected. Examination of the witnesses at Balasore, it is stated would be convenient to the witnesses and less expensive for the exchequer. This is not correct. A witness examined by the prosecution is entitled to his expenses for coming to Court and giving back to the place wherefrom he came. Under the system of administration, funds are allocated for the purpose. Balasore court would have no excess fund for meeting these expenses. There is no provision whereunder Balasore court can demand back the expenses occurred from Baripada Court. Thus, witnesses may suffer on that account. Again there may be delay in completion of trial if Balasore court would be over burdened with cases. All these circumstances would not stand on the way for obstructions of fair trial to the accused. These are also factors to be kept in mind while striking a balance in favour of transfer under section 407 Cr. P. C. I am satisfied that the nature of convenience between Balasore and Baripada is only a differential distance of 20 Kilometers and the same is not a factor to tilt the balance in favour of transfer. ( 10 ) IN the result, the three applications have no merit which are accordingly dismissed. .