Dismissed¶7

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2026TACR/24/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of criminal trial - allegation of bias - first informant claimed he overheard father of jailed accused discussing Rs. 25 lakh settlement with court peon - vague, uncorroborated allegation at fag end of trial fixed for final arguments - Sessions Judge, Meerut dismissal of transfer application upheld - direction for expeditious trial under Section 309 Cr.P.C. - Transfer Application (Criminal) dismissed - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - TACR No. 24 of 2026 - Samit Gopal, J.

What did the court decide?

The allegation that Rambir, father of an accused in jail, discussed a Rs. 25 lakh settlement with Pramod, peon of the trial court, as levelled by the applicant (first informant), is without any corroboration and substance, being a vague allegation made at the fag end of a trial fixed for final arguments ¶6

Ajay Kumar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the Session Case No. 1278/2023 (S.T. No. 774 of 2023) arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2023 under Sections 302 & 506 IPC, pending before the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Meerut, ought to be transferred to another court on the allegation that the father of an accused was overheard discussing a Rs. 25 lakh settlement with the peon of the trial court +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

¶6

Ratio / Principle

The order dated 03.12.2025 of the Sessions Judge, Meerut dismissing the transfer application does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality

¶6

Key takeaways

The present transfer application (TACR No. 24 of 2026) is dismissedratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Samit Gopal, J.) dismissed Transfer Application (Criminal) No. 24 of 2026 filed by the first informant Ajay Kumar seeking transfer of Session Case No. 1278/2023 (S.T. No. 774 of 2023), arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2023 under Sections 302 & 506 IPC, PS Inchauli, District Meerut, from the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Meerut. Transfer was sought on the ground that on 30.10.2025 the applicant overheard Rambir, father of accused Abhishek (in jail), discussing a Rs. 25 lakh settlement with Pramod, peon of the trial court, whereafter 10 days' time was granted and the case adjourned to 10.11.2025. The Sessions Judge, Meerut had by order dated 03.12.2025 dismissed an earlier transfer application dated 04.11.2025 after calling a report from the trial court, noting that the matter was fixed for arguments and that the High Court had directed expeditious disposal following Section 309 Cr.P.C. Held: at the fag end of the trial, the vague and uncorroborated allegation of the first informant did not warrant transfer of the trial; the impugned order does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality. Transfer application dismissed.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 24 of 2026

Ajay Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others

¶6

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mandvi Tripathi, Santosh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 53

¶7

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶8

1. List revised.

¶9

Heard Sri Santosh Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶10

The present transfer application has been filed by the applicantAjay Kumar, with the prayer to transfer the Session Case No. 1278 / 2023 (S.T. No. 774 of 2023) arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2023, under Sections 302 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station Inchauli, District Meerut, pending in the court of District & Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Meerut to any other court having jurisdiction for trial according to law, during the pendency of the present transfer application and / or issue such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶11

The grievance of learned counsel for the applicant before this Court is that he on the date fixed in the matter on 30.10.2025 saw Rambir the father of the accused Abhishek (who is in jail) talking to Pramod the peon of 10th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Meerut outside the washroom. It is submitted that there has been a settlement of Rs. 25 Lakhs in the matter and Rambir requested Pramod for 10 days time to arrange the money to which Pramod agreed to it. The applicant was standing inside the door of the washroom and heard the conversation while they were whispering

¶12

TACR No. 24 of 2026

¶13

¶14

about it. Later on, the Presiding Officer granted 10 days time to the accused and the case was adjourned to 10.11.2025 vide an order passed on the said date i.e. 30.10.2025. It is submitted that an application for transfer dated 04.11.2025 was moved to the said effect before the Sessions Judge, Meerut which has been dismissed vide an order dated 03.12.2025 passed by the said court by observing that the matter is fixed for arguments and also that the transfer application was moved to delay the disposal of the trial. It was further observed that there is a direction of the High Court to expedite the disposal of the said trial by following the procedure of Section 309 Cr.P.C. and to dispose it of expeditiously. It is submitted that thus the order impugned deserves to be set-aside and the trial deserves to be transferred from the court of the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Meerut to any other court having jurisdiction to try it.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and petition for transfer and submitted that in so far as the allegation as levelled by the applicant in his transfer application is concerned, the same is totally unfounded. It is submitted that the trial was previously with the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Meerut which was transferred to the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Meerut vide order dated 06.02.2025 and then the evidence started to be recorded in it by the said court which recorded all the evidences and now the matter is at the stage of arguments. It is submitted that the order-sheet of the trial court which is annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit which is from 31.07.2023 to 01.12.2025 shows the same. It is submitted that the allegation of Rambir the father of one of the accused who is in jail talking to Pramod the peon of the trial court outside the washroom is totally without any substance and merely an attempt to delay the trial. It is submitted that the applicant is the first informant of the case who has levelled the said allegation without any corroboration and substance. It is submitted that the transfer application of the applicant was rejected by the Sessions Judge by an order in detail after seeking a report from the trial court concerned which has also been referred to in the order impugned. It is submitted that the present transfer application be dismissed.

¶16

TACR No. 24 of 2026

¶17

¶18

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the first informant of the present matter and the trial of the said case is on the verge of completion as is being fixed for final arguments. At this stage an application for transfer dated 04.11.2025 was moved by the first informant on the ground that he has heard Rambir the father of one of the accused who is in jail talking to Pramod the peon of the trial judge where there was some discussion of Rs. 25 lakhs to be given for which time was being sought by him which was assured by the said peon subsequent to which the trial court adjourned the matter for 10 days. On the transfer application the Sessions Judge called for a report from the trial court which has also been referred to in the impugned order. The Sessions Judge concerned did not find any substance in the said allegation and thus dismissed the said transfer application. The allegation as levelled by the applicant is without any corroboration and substance. At the fag end of the trial vague allegation has been levelled. The order impugned does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality.

¶19

The present transfer application is dismissed .

¶20

January 16, 2026 AS Rathore

¶21

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Vimla Bhambri vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anuj Kumar vs State of Up and Another

Ramesh Chandra and 10 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Satija vs State of U.P. and Another

Naresh Chandra Chauhan vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyaveer vs State of U.P.