JUDGMENT Hon'ble Shri Narayan Shukla,J. Supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. Heard Mr. R.P.Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate.? 3. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.4.2011 passed by the Session Judge, Gonda in Criminal Misc. Case No. 99 of 2011, whereby he allowed the transfer application moved by one Ram Saran Sharma, Chairman, Railway Employees Consumer Co-operative Society Ltd, Badgaon, Gonda and transferred the? bail application? no. 140/11 arising out of case crime no. 241/11 under sections 420 IPC and 3/7 Essential Commodities Act to the court of Judicial Magistrate- II,Gonda. Though he is neither a complainant nor accused? in the matter nor has concern in any manner? with the case? but in the aforesaid capacity he came forward? to move such application. 4. Upon perusal of the record, I find that? the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Ist, Gonda,? who is authorized by the particular notification to deal with the cases under Essential Commodities Act heard the bail application on 25.4.2011 and posted it? for order on 27.4.2011. In the meantime, on 26.4.2011 the application for transfer? was moved before the District and Sessions Judge, Gonda.The? reason for moving the transfer application is that? the applicant? came to know on hearsay? that the accused are trying to get bail in any way by influencing the Presiding Officer? concerned; whereas? the said application? is not substantiated with any evidence. It is very strange? that only on the apprehension the learned Sessions Judge, Gonda? entertained the application? for transfer? and also transferred the case? to the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Gonda, who has no jurisdiction to deal with the cases under Essential Commodities Act. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down? several? guidelines to deal with the transfer cases recently in the case of the Nahar Singh Yadav and another Vs. Union of India and others (2011) 1 SCC 307 . to the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Gonda, who has no jurisdiction to deal with the cases under Essential Commodities Act. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down? several? guidelines to deal with the transfer cases recently in the case of the Nahar Singh Yadav and another Vs. Union of India and others (2011) 1 SCC 307 . The Hon'ble Supreme Court has framed the fallowing guidelines:-- ?" Thus, although no rigid and inflexible rule or test could be laid down to decide whether or not power under Section 406 CrPC should be exercised, it is manifest from a bare reading of sub-section (2) and (3) of the said section and on an analysis of the decisions of this Court that an order of transfer of trial isl not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because an interested party has expressed some apprehension about the proper conduct of a trial. This power has to be exercised cautiously and in exceptional situations, where it becomes necessary to do so to provide credibility to the trial, some of the broad factors which could be kept in mind while considering an application for transfer of the trial are: (i) when it appears that the State machinery or prosecution is acting hand in glove? with the accused, and there? is likelihood of miscarriage of justice due to the lackadaisical attitude of the prosecution;? ? ?(II)when there is material to show that the accused may influence the prosecution witnesses or cause physical harm to the complainant;? (iii) comparative inconvenience and hardships likely to be caused to the accused, the complainant/ the prosecution and the witnesses, beside the burden to be borne by the State exchequer in making payment of travelling and other expenses of the official and non-official witnesses; (iv) a communally surcharged atmosphere, indicating some proof of inability of holding fair and impartial trial because of the accusations made and the nature of the crime committed by the accused;and? (V)existence of some material from which it can be inferred that some person are so hostile that they are interfering or are likely to interfere either directly or indirectly with the course of justice." 6. In light of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that? the Sessions Judge, Gonda has exceeded his jurisdiction and passed the order? by entertaining the? transfer application of a? person? In light of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that? the Sessions Judge, Gonda has exceeded his jurisdiction and passed the order? by entertaining the? transfer application of a? person? who has no locus to move the? said application. Though the conduct of the? Sessions Judge, Gonda is not appreciable and it needs comment? but I leave it for the administrative side. 7. Under the circumstances, the order impugned dated 27.4.2011 passed by the Session Judge, Gonda is hereby? quashed with the direction to place the bail application? before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- I, Gonda who is authorised to deal with the cases under Essential Commodities Act for order? at an early date.? 8. In the aforesaid terms, the petition is disposed of finally.? Let a copy of this order be placed before the the Administrative Judge, Gonda for his kind perusal.