MALIK RAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking setting aside of the order of the Sessions Judge dated October 6, 1983, in Sessions Trial No. 476 of 1980, under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code. In the alternative, this application was also headed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) In respect of an incident of murder, the applicant Malik Ram along with another was committed to the Court of Session, Allahabad. On commitment, the Sessions Trial was numbered as S.T. No. 476 of 1980 and was pending before Sri J.B. Singh, the then VII Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad. Sri J.B. Singh recorded the statements of two eye witnesses, who are Ram Swarup Kesarwani and Husain Akhtar. In due course, Sri J.B. Singh became V Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad. On 5/10/1983, the Sessions Judge, Allahabad, passed the following order in respect of the aforesaid sessions case: The file is transferred to the court of V Additional District Judge vide District Judges order dated 4/10/83.On 6/10/1983, an objection was raised to the jurisdiction of Sri J.B. Singh, V Additional District Judge, Allahahad, about his power to hear and decide Sessions Trial No. 476 of 1980. The learned Additional District Judge overruled the objection holding that the controversy raised before him was covered by a decision of the High Court reported in Punjab Singh v. State of U.P.1. While rejecting the preliminary objection, the learned Additional District Judge mentioned that he had recorded the statements of P.W. 1 Ram Swarup and P.W. 2 Husain Akhtar as Presiding Officer of the court of VII Additional District Judge. The applicant thereafter filed the present case in this Court and challenged the impugned order on the ground that since Sri J.B. Singh was the VII Additional District Judge when be had recorded the statements, he ceased to have jurisdiction to try the said Sessions Trial on becoming the Vth Additional District Judge. It was also contended that Sri J.B. Singh could not transfer a sessions trial from the file of VII Additional District Judge himself to the court of Vth Additional Sessions Judge.

(3.) This application has been contested on behalf of the complainant. The allegation that the file of Sessions Trial in question had been taken by Sri J.B. Singh himself was disputed as wrong. The complainant alleged that on 5-10-1983, the Sessions Judge had sent the file to the court Vth Additional District Judge. It was further contended that on becoming Vth Additional District Judge Sri J.B. Singh did not cease to be the court competent to try Sessions Trial No. 476 of 1980.