AMAR SRINIVAS TIWARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition which purports to be under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 Cr. P.C. takes exception to the order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate whereby Criminal Case No. 228/P/92 has been transferred from 5th Court to 16th Court. It arises as follows :

(2.) IT appears that one Virendra Parikh, Advocate, wrote a letter cum application on 12th January 1996 to the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate wherein he stated that he had met the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate earlier and had requested not to transfer the case to the 5th Court and yet that has been done and that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had assured him that even if the case is transferred the same would be retransferred to 16th Court and that is not done. He, therefore, requested the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to retransfer the case to 16th Court and in the meantime stay further proceedings.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and it was submitted that the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 16th Court, Mr. Rankhambe had recorded the entire evidence and has now recorded the statements of five accused persons under Section 313 Cr. P.C. The matter has been transferred to 16th Court thereby depriving the petitioner of the opportunity that the learned Magistrate had, of observing the demeanor of the witnesses. He, therefore, submitted that this order is unsustainable and particularly such an order should not have been passed on the letter cum application of the advocate who claims to be watching the proceedings of the case for the complaint and the prosecution is stated to be on a police report.