AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.S. Grewal, J.—The accused are present in Court. They have been asked through learned DAG, Haryana whether they have any objection to the transfer of the trial, they have not expressed any objection to the proposed course of action.
This application u/s 407 Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by complainant- Jai Parkash for transfer of the trial entitled State v. Jitender and others, Sessions trial 13/2004, FIR No. 271 dated 13.11.2003 u/s 302/34 IPC from the Court of Shri S.K. Goel, Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat to the Court of Shri A.K. Tyagi, Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat.
The trial had earlier been conducted by Shri A.K. Tyagi, Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat. Charge was framed against Jitender on September 14, 2004. Thereafter, statement of the complainant, Petitioner herein, was recorded and application u/s 319 Code of Criminal Procedure for summoning Jasmer Singh and Yashbir Singh was filed and the application was allowed on July 23, 2005.
(sic) the Court of Shri A.K. Goel and transferred to the Court of Shri S.K. Goel.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that once the trial has commenced, the trial cannot be transferred from one Court to another. Reference is made to the provisions of Section 409 Code of Criminal Procedure The learned Counsel is quite correct in his submission since the power of withdrawal of case by the learned Sessions Judge is u/s 409 Code of Criminal Procedure and it provides that this can be done at any time before the trial of the case has commenced. Reference may be made to Section 409(2) Code of Criminal Procedure Since the trial had commenced, the trial should not have been transferred.
Resultantly, this application is allowed, the trial of the case is sent back to the Court of Shri A.K. Tyagi, Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat.
Application allowed.