LAWS(GJH)-2001-5-5

RAJU Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On May 01, 2001
RAJU Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner abovenamed, being original accused no. 5 in Sessions Case No. 77/2000 pending before the City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad, has preferred this Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Code"), challenging the order dated 29th August, 2000 recorded by the learned City Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, at Ahmedabad, dismissing the Criminal Revision Application No. 1648/2000 in Sessions Case No. 77/2000, which was filed by the present petitioner for transferring the said sessions case No. 77/2000 on file of the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, who has framed the charge against the petitioner and other accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with 34, 114, 201 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) It seems to be the case of the present petitioner that the aforesaid sessions case being Session Case No. 77/2000 is pending in the City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad. It has also his case that the charge was framed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Court no. 2 for the aforesaid offences. That the present matter was placed before another Additional Sessions Judge for trial according to law. The petitioner abovenamed preferred aforesaid application stating that since the charge was framed in the aforesaid matter by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Court no. 2, the trial ought to be conducted by that Additional Sessions Judge and not by any other Additional Sessions Judge of the City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad. Therefore, the petitioner prayed that not to the transfer the said sessions case for being tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who has not framed the charge as aforesaid against the petitioner and other accused person and to transfer it to the additional City Sessions Judge, who has framed charge.

(3.) The learned City Sessions Judge after hearing the learned advocates for the parties, dismissed the said application of the petitioner.