The Allahabad High Court recently rejected a plea seeking case transfer to another court on the ground that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate who is presently hearing the matter had met one Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) leader who is also the husband of one of the respondents, in his chamber.
Stating that petitioner’s contention regarding the SDM and BJP leader meeting is also misconceived, Court observed, “Executive Officers such as Sub-Divisional Magistrate also do various administrative functions wherein, they are supposed to meet the general public in day-to-day basis for discharging his duties.”
Bench of Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar also said that there are regular Tehsil Divas that are hosted in every Tehsil at least once in a week where the general member of public come and meet the officer or the SDM.
Also, finding no material on record having been filed in support of petitioner apprehension that due to this alleged meeting he may not get justice, Court, therefore, held that this ground alone cannot be a ground for transferring or withdrawing the case from a particular court.
The plea was moved by one Himanshu Singh seeking quashing of an order of District Magistrate, Bahraich dated September 22, 2021, which had rejected his prayer for transfer of the proceedings to any other SDM Magistrate from the current one.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a transfer application had been filed under Section 411 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before the District Magistrate, Bahraich on the ground that the husband of opposite party no. 2 , namely Udai Pratap Singh who is a local BJP leader and has contested elections as a member of the Jila Panchayat in Visheshwarganj, District Bahraich frequently meets the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate in his chamber before whom the proceeding in the matter under Section 145 CrPC are pending.
This application under section 411, CrPC was rejected by the District Magistrate, Bahraich, against which the applicant came knocking court’s door for relief.
The petitioner had submitted before the court that he is under a legitimate apprehension that he may not get justice from the current SDM court.
To be noted, apart from this apprehension, there was no other ground taken in the present petition for transferring or withdrawal of the pending proceedings before the court of SDM, Bahraich.
The Additional Government Advocate also had contended that apart from the 'bald assertion' no material had been placed by the petitioner before the Court to support such a contention.
Agreeing with the AGA’s submissions, the Court noted that the petitioner's contentions are not supported with any material to substantiate his pleadings.
"However, he has not filed any material in support of this case to show as to why he will not get justice", the Court stated.
Accordingly, the plea was rejected with the direction that pending proceedings under Section 145 CrPC shall be expedited at an early date.
"The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality as while passing the impugned order the District Magistrate Bahraich has recorded the reasons as to why the prayer of the petitioner has been rejected. I am satisfied with the reasoning recorded by the District Magistrate. The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed," the Court held.
Case Title: Himanshu Singh v. State of U.P. & Another
Please Login or Register