Dismissed

Sumer Soni v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2025CRLR/3429/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision, the Allahabad High Court declined to quash an order transferring two related pending cases to the same Special Judge, holding no illegality existed in transferring the cases without detailing that they were 'cross cases.'

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision was disposed of with the observation that the petitioner may file an application in the trial court if dissatisfied with the 'cross case' status.

Sumer Soni vs State of U.P. and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:136922

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3429 of 2025

¶4

Revisionist :- Sumer Soni Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Shiv Ram Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present revision has been preferred by the revisionist against the order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the Sessions Judge, Basti in Criminal Misc. Case No. 256 of 2024 (Dharmatma Vs. State of U.P.), Police Station Rudhauli, District Basti in S.T. No. 792 of 2022 (State Vs. Dharmatma), arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Rudhauli, District Basti and S.T. No. 495 of 2022 (State Vs. Sumer Soni and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 122 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)da), (dha) and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, pending in the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Basti whereby the transfer application moved by the opposite party no. 2 was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Basti.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that a transfer application was moved by the opposite party no. 2 stating therein that S.T. No. 792 of 2022 (State Vs. Dharmatma), arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Rudhauli, District Basti is pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. 1st, Basti and its cross being S.T. No. 495 of 2022 (State Vs. Sumer Soni and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 122 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da), (dha) and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, pending in the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Basti should be transferred in one and the same court and both the cases should be tried by the same court because the date and time of both the incidents are same. It is further submitted that the learned Sessions Judge, Basti passed the impugned order dated 31.07.2024 which is quoted herein below:-

¶9

"Looking to the facts and circumstances, grounds shown in transfer application is sufficient. Hence, S.T. no. 792/2022 State vs. Dharmatma, case crime no. 243/2021, u/s 147, 323, 325, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Rudhauli, District Basti pending in the court of A.S.J./F.T.C. 1st, Basti is, hereby, recalled and transferred to the court of Spl. Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Basti for disposal according to law."

¶10

It is further submitted that while deciding the transfer application, the learned Sessions Judge, Basti has not made any observation that both the cases are cross cases and on this ground they are transferred in one and the same court.

¶11

From perusal of the impugned order dated 31.07.2024, it reveals that the transfer application was moved by the opposite party no. 2 on the ground of being cross case of S.T. No. 792/2022 and S.T. No. 495/2022 but the learned Sessions Judge, Basti has nowhere observed that both the cases are cross cases. It is true that the impugned order was passed to transfer both the cases in one and same court but there is no finding in the said order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Basti that the transfer application was moved on the ground of cross cases. In the aforesaid scenario, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Basti.

¶12

However, in case the revisionist has grievance that why both the cases are running in one and the same court, the revisionist may file an application before the learned trial court raising his grievance that both the cases should not have been treated as cross cases. In case the revisionist moves any such application before the trial court, the trial court is expected to dispose of the said application in accordance with law.

¶13

With the aforesaid observation, this revision is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Rmk.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sumer Soni v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumer Soni v. State of U.P. 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

Raj Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhay Dubey Alias Mathri vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Neta @ Geeta and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Nanka vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju Thakur vs State of U.P. and Another

Jay Karan vs State of Up and Another