Dismissed

Deepak Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Allahabad HC30 Aug 2018TACR/345/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a Criminal Transfer Application challenging the rejection of an earlier transfer plea on grounds of bias and pre-judgment. The Court held that requests for clarification during argument stages do not constitute expressing final opinions on the merits warranting transfer, and revoked the lower court's impugned order in favor of quick disposition.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 13.08.2018 dismissing the prior transfer application was upheld. Trial directed to be expedited.

Deepak Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

AFR

¶2

Court No. - 42

¶3

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 345 of 2018

¶4

Applicant :- Deepak Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ali Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

This Transfer Application has been moved by the applicant with a prayer to allow the instance application set aside the order dated 13.08.2018 passed by District and Sessions judge, Gautam Buddh nagar in Transfer Application No.694 of 2018 and transfer the Sessions Trial No.843 of 2011, under Sections 302, 34 IPC, Police Sttion- Sector39 NOIDA, District Gautam Buddh Nagar (State of U.P. Versus Vivek and others) from the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, I- Gautam Buddh Nagar to any other court having jurisdiction of Sessions trial in the same Sessions Division.

¶8

The specific allegations has been made that the trial court has expressed its opinion on the merit of the case and it being a case of eye-account testimony regarding murder of brother of the applicant- informant and he submitted that the trial court is working under influence of the accused- respondent and chances of fair trial are bleak. Once the trial court has expressed its opinion then it will not be in the fitness of things that the same Judge/court should decide the concerned trial. Application for transfer of the case was moved before the Sessions Judge, Gautam Buddh Nagar, but he too could not consider the concept of fair trial and rejected the application for transferring the case from the court of Ist

¶9

Additional Sessions Judge, Gautam Buddh Nagar to any other court of the same Sessions Division.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. submits on ground that there is no specific opinion expressed by the trial court as claimed by the applicant.

¶11

Considered the above submissions and took note of the contents of the impugned order dated 13.08.2018 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Gautam Buddh Nagar, wherein specific observations have been made regarding certain facts, which facts go to clarify that in this case previously order of speedy disposal of the concerned Sessions Trial No.843 of 2011 was issued by Division Bench of this Court and specific time allotted for conclusion of trial had expired and the proceeding was at the stage of argument.

¶12

Obviously, certain points were raised by the trial court during course of argument whereby clarification was sought on some aspects by the trial court. That act by itself is part and asking the procedure of argument. Merely by asking clarification on certain points would not and cannot be construed in manner that the trial court has expressed its opinion on the ultimate merit of the case. The concerned Presiding Judge has also supplied his comment to the Sessions Judge, wherein he has denied having expressed any such opinion on the merit of the case. But he has clarified that the case is at argument stage and the proceedings are to be expedited, as per the earlier direction passed by this Court. The learned Sessions Jude concerned has taken the wholesome view on the entirety of the claim raised before him and has rightly passed order on the transfer application and has rejected the same. It is usual practice of the trial court to ask

¶13

certain clarification on certain points involved in the case for proper adjudication of the case and that gesture by itself does not vindicate the claim that the final merit of the case has been expressed by the court below while asking clarification on certain points.

¶14

Consequently, the present transfer application being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed .

¶15

However, observation so made shall not touch the merit of the case.

¶16

Concerned trial court is directed to expedite the proceedings at the earliest.

¶17

Order Date :- 30.8.2018 Raj

Deepak Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyoti Shukla (Corpus) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kutubuddin Khan Alias Raju Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mamta (Minor ) and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ayesha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virendra Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Pal and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others