TH. BENI MADHO SINGH Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for the transfer of proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C., pending before the Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Biswan, district Sitapur against the applicant and others to some other Court.

(2.) IT appears that there is a plot of land No. 463 in respect of which the two sons of the applicant claim to be in cultivatory possession. A report, it seems, was made by some persons belonging to village Manpur that the plot of land or some part of it was in their possession and that the applicant and his friends were trying to oust them from the possession of the plot. The police made enquires and submitted a report to the Sub -Divisional Magistrate recommending proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C., against the applicant and others. A report was also asked for from the police on the complaint under Section 107 Cr.P.C., made by Raj Bahadur Singh, son of the applicant. This report was, however, against the applicant's son and the Magistrate acting on the police report dismissed the complaint made by Raj Bahadur Singh on the 22nd of July, 1953. In the case, which was pending under Section 107 Cr.P.C, against the applicant and others, there were some hearings till ultimately the case was taken up on the 10th of June, 1953, by the present Sub -Divisional Magistrate. It is alleged on behalf of the applicant that on the 10th of June, 1953, the learned Magistrate asked the applicant and others, who were being proceeded against under Section 107 Cr.P.C., that they may file personal bonds for a period of one year and they would be free otherwise they will undergo the harassment of trial. Then again on the 22nd of July, 1953, the learned Magistrate is said to have made a remark that he would not leave persons who were polished or spruce. These remarks made by the Magistrate and his conduct in asking the applicant and others to file bonds for one year raised an apprehension in the mind of the applicant he will not have a fair trial in the court of the present Sub -Divisional Magistrate.

(3.) IN the present case it is admitted by the learned Magistrate that he did ask the applicant to file bonds for one year. The learned Magistrate may perhaps have been actuated by the best of motives to save the applicant from harassment which he might have had to undergo if the case was tried to the finish, yet such a procedure adopted by a Magistrate is likely to create an apprehension in the mind of the accused that the learned Magistrate had made up his mind in the matter pending before him.