RAMPAL SINGH, J. ( 1 ) THIS order shall also dispose of M. Cr. C. No. 1817 of 1988. Shri Rajendra Singh, Sr. Advocate represents applicant Govind Lohana and Smt. Choudhary represents applicant Kanhaiya Lal. Shri Ravindra Shrivastava, Advocate represents the complainant with Shri B. P. Singh, G. A. for the State. ( 2 ) GOVIND Lohana had a wife, Shantibai. On 7-9-1987, she is alleged to have been murdered, by causing severe injuries to her person by the applicant Govind Lohana and it is further alleged that her body was then set on fire. Arjun Bhojwani, is the brother of deceased Mst. Shantibai. Govind Lohana was arrested on 8-9-1987 and was lodged in Central Jail Bilaspur. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bilaspur sent an application to the trial Judge that it would be dangerous to keep the applicant Govind Lohana in jail because he had been the doctor of that jail and the safety of the applicant Govind Lohana is endangered at the hands of the prisoners of jail. Hence, he should be transferred from jail. Consequently, the trial Judge directed him to be transferred to Central Jail Ra i pu r. ( 3 ) THE Sessions Trial is now pending in the Court of Sessions Judge at Bilaspur. By this petition. the applicant Govind Lohana prays that this Sessions Trial be transferred either to Raipur or to Durg because his brother applicant Kanhaiyalal who comes from Raipur for looking after his defence was assaulted by the brother of the deceased Mst. Shantibai. He further contended that at Bilaspur they are influential persons. The applicants have further contended in the petition that at Bilaspur applicant Kanhaiyalal will not be able to defend him. In M. Cr. C. No. 1817/88, applicant Karmaiyalal has prayed that the case of his brother Govind Lohana which is pending at Bilaspur be transferred to Raipur or to Durg. This is the only ground prayed in these petitions, though at the bar in a passing manner, Shri Rajendra Singh, Advocate contended that at Bilaspur, he may not get the services of good and Senior lawyers. This is the only ground prayed in these petitions, though at the bar in a passing manner, Shri Rajendra Singh, Advocate contended that at Bilaspur, he may not get the services of good and Senior lawyers. ( 4 ) PRAYER for transfer of the Sessions Trial has been opposed by Shri Ravindra Shrivastava and Shri B. P. Singh, Government Advocate under Section 407 of the Criminal Procedure Code, whenever it appears to the High Court that the fair and impartial enquiry or the trial cannot be held in a Criminal Court subordinate thereto, then the High Court may transfer the case to another Court. Ordinarily the case should not be transferred from the Court which has got the territorial jurisdiction but if the fair and impartial trial cannot be held in that Court then the High Court may, in its discretion, transfer the case to other Sessions Court. ( 5 ) ON perusal of the petition, it appears that because Kanhaiyalal is alleged to have been assaulted by the brother of the deceased, the applicant apprehends that he will not get a fair trial at Bilaspur. Whether Kanhaiyalal was assaulted or not cannot be decided in these proceedings. The apprehension of the petitioner that due to the relatives of the deceased, a fair trial cannot be held, appears to be baseless because this prosecution has been launched not on the complaint of any private party or person but the cognizance has been taken by the Police and after investigation, the chargesheet has been filed. If the brother of the applicant Kanhaiyalal feels that his presence in Bilaspur is likely to cause him any harm, he can always seek the protection of the law enforcement authorities. The law enforcement authorities can start preventive proceedings against such persons. Only because Kanhaiyalal apprehends danger to his life, is no ground to transfer the Sessions trial in which Govind Lohana is an accused He is in custody and well guarded. There appears to be no danger to the life or person of the applicants. The law enforcement authorities can start preventive proceedings against such persons. Only because Kanhaiyalal apprehends danger to his life, is no ground to transfer the Sessions trial in which Govind Lohana is an accused He is in custody and well guarded. There appears to be no danger to the life or person of the applicants. ( 6 ) IN the petition, now here it has been mentioned that the services of good advocates are not available at Bilaspur, that he has got any difficulty in procuring such services, that except one incident with his brother further incidents have taken place and in what manner, he win be prejudiced with the trial when the trial takes place at Bilaspur, has not been shown. The material placed before this Court urging for the transfer of the Sessions trial does not appear to be justifiable prima facie. The ground on which the transfer is sought is also frivolous. ( 7 ) IT has been informed that the prosecution intends to examine 35 witnesses who are residents of Bilaspur. The case was registered at Police Station Bilaspur and the entire investigation was carried out at Bilaspur. While considering the prayer for transfer of a trial, it has it also to be looked in, as to whether the prosecution will also have any difficulty or not. The Supreme Court has laid down, in Mrs. Maneka Sanjay Gandhi1, the following principles with regard to it: Assurance of a fair trial is the first imperative of the dispensation of justice and the central criterion for the court to consider when a motion for transfer is made is not the hypersentivity or relative convenience of a party or easy availability of legal services or like mini-grievances. Something more substantial, more compelling, more imperilling, from the point of view of public necessious if the court is to exercise its power of transfer. This is the cardinal principle although the circumstances may be myriad and vary from case to case. The grounds for the transfer have to be tested on this touch-stone bearing in mind the rule that normally the complainant has the right to choose any court having jurisdiction and the accused cannot dictate where the case against him should be tried. Even so, the process of justice should not harass the parties and from that angle the court may weigh the circumstances. Even so, the process of justice should not harass the parties and from that angle the court may weigh the circumstances. Keeping in view these principles, it has to be seen whether a fair trial will be available to the applicants at Bilaspur or not. The frivolous grounds taken by the applicants requesting the transfer of the Sessions Trial from Bilaspur deserves outright rejection. I place complete reliance upon the principles laid down in Maneka Gandhi (supra ). These applications are without any substance and deserve to be dismissed, and are dismissed. ( 8 ) THE proceedings in the Sessions trial were stayed by this Court. The stay order is vacated and the Sessions Judge is directed to proceed with the trial. No order as to costs. .