Dismissed

Devi Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2024/86/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a criminal transfer application in a murder case. The applicant sought transfer due to injustice and failure of non-transfer of cases involving the applicant after a Section 311 application was rejected. The court found the grounds vague and lacked annexed documents.

What did the court decide?

Transfer application dismissed; trial to remain before the learned First Additional Session Judge, Gonda.

Devi Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:75159

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 86 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Devi Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Nath Mishra,Prachish Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present transfer application is filed with the prayer to transfer the Sessions Trial No.291/2021, 'State of U.P. Vs. Devi Prasad & Ors.', under Sections 302/34, 307/34 I.P.C., pending before learned First Additional Session Judge, Gonda.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case but the charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating OfÏcer in the most mechanical manner, thereafter, case was committed to the Court of Sessions, charge was framed and witnesses were examined. He further submits that application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was moved for recall of the witnesses but it was heard by the applicant that aforesaid application of the applicant would be rejected on the date fixed, and this was happened true, thereafter, transfer application was filed before the Sessions Judge, Gonda, which was rejected in the most mechanical manner. He further submits that after filing of the transfer application before the Sessions Judge, Gonda report was also sought from the court concerned and court concerned has reported that in case, case of the applicant is transferred to any other court, then court has no objection, even then case of the applicant was not transferred.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of the applicant and submits that there is no illegality in the order passed by the court below as merely on the basis of suspicion case is not transferred from one court to another. He also submits that only

¶10

fictitious allegations are levelled, therefore, present transfer application is liable to be dismissed.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant documents, it is evident from the record that after recording the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., case is running for argument but application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant for recall of witnesses, which was rejected by the learned trial court, thereafter, transfer application was moved merely on the basis of apprehension that justice will not be done with him, it is also evident that neither the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. nor the order has been annexed with the application. In such circumstances, merely on the basis of vague allegations against the trial court, trial of the case cannot be transferred to any other court, accordingly, the present transfer application is hereby, dismissed .

¶12

Order Date :- 13.11.2024 Gaurav/-

¶13

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Devi Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devi Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

C/M New Ideal Convent Public School Paliya Subeha Thru. Manager Pawan Kumar Dwivedi and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Balram Bhatt @ Balram Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Mewalal and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Rajesh Kumar Poddar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Manish Kumar Pandey and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Alok Ranjan and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another