Judgment Nagendra Rai, J. 1. The present application has been filed for transfer of Sessions Trial No. 290 of 1994 pending in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge Chatra to another District/Sessions Division of Bihar. 2. The facts necessary for disposal of this present application are that the opposite party No. 2 who is practising as an Advocate at Chatra Bar, instituted a case being Hunterganj P. S. Case No. 52 of 1994 under Section 307 and other alied sections of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. In the said case the police has submitted charge-sheet and after commitment the case is pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Chatra. 3. The ground for transfer of the case urged on behalf of the petitioners is that the informant is a senior Advocate practising at Chatra and the Bar Association at Chatra has passed a resolution that in case of assault on the person of any member of the Bar Association no member will take brief and will do pairavi on behalf of accused persons. It is also asserted that the cause of the aforesaid resolution and so the fact that the informant is a senior member of the Bar the petitioners are not getting the services of the Sr. Advocate to conduct the trial. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the informant, wherein the assertion that the Sr. Advocate of Chatra are not appearing on behalf of the petitioners is denied but the fact that the Chatra Bar Association passed a resolution as contained in Annexure-4 has not been denied. 5. In this case without going the question as to whether the petitioners are getting services of the Sr. Advocate of Chatra Bar or not to conduct cases on their behalf, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that in the ends of justice the prayer made by the petitioners should be allowed. 6. It is well settled that justices should not be done only but it should appear to have been done. As the informant is a senior Advocate at Chatra Bar the apprehension of the petitioners that their trial cannot be held at Chatra could not be said to be without any basis. 6. It is well settled that justices should not be done only but it should appear to have been done. As the informant is a senior Advocate at Chatra Bar the apprehension of the petitioners that their trial cannot be held at Chatra could not be said to be without any basis. The Seesions trial pending in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Chatra is hereby transferred to the Court of Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, who will either himself try the case of transfer to some other Additional Sessions Judge for trial. 7. In the result this application is allowed.