Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 3743 (ALL)

Ashok v. State of U. P.

2015-12-01

ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA I

body2015
JUDGMENT Arvind Kumar Mishra-I, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. By way of the instant application under Section 407 Cr.P.C., proceedings of Sessions Trial No.688 of 2013 State vs. Ashok and others, under Section 302 , 504 IPC, Police Station Jahangirabad, District Bulandshahar along with Sessions Trial No.689 of 2013 State Vs. Vikram, under Section 25 Arms Act, Police Station Jahangirabad, District Bulandshahar have been sought to be transfered to anther Court from the same Sessions Division. 3. The grounds urged by learned counsel for the applicants in support of the transfer application are very much confined to the extent that in this case, the first informant/complainant has openly declared that she will get an order of conviction easily from the Presiding Officer concerned as the matter has been settled with the Presiding Officer concerned. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that the matter is pending at final hearing stage and evidence pros and cons have been completed. 5. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer so made and submitted that every person has an opportunity to get the case transfered provided the person comes out with cogent and specific reasons justifying the transfer of the case from one Court to another. In the present case, allegations are vague and stereotyped. Consequently, the prayer so made by the applicant on the ground of settlement of the case with the Presiding Officer will not generate any plausible reason to get the matter transferred from one Court to another in the same Sessions division. 6. Considered the submissions and perused the transfer application dated 29.10.2015 so moved before the Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar and also the order passed on the transfer application. In my view, no case for transfer is made out. From perusal of the record, it transpires that such allegations made against the Presiding Officer minus any corroborative force or relevant material on record/circumstances will not ipso facto justify the transfer of the case. Accordingly, the instant transfer application is dismissed.