STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RATTAN KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of criminal revision petitions Nos. 72 to 75 of 1980 since common question of law is involved.

(2.) The respondents are government servants. They had gone on strike. They were charge -sheeted under section 7 of the Himachal Pradesh Essent;al Services (Maintenance) Act, 1972. They were being tried in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan. On 29th September, 1980 they moved Shri H. D. Kainthla, Sessions Judge, Solan and Sirmur Districts at Nahan, for transfer of their cases. Common allegations were made. These were that the Magistrate had decided to try the cases in a summary manner despite the objections of the respondents. A grievance was made that the Magistrate was proceeding on day -to -day basis which was the result of "his special interest in the case." It was also alleged that the Magistrate on 26 -9 -1980 had said ; "that I had thought that the accused would plead guilty". It was averred that the Magistrate had remarked in the open court that he would finish the cases in two days and he will give a decision which will deter the other government employees from joining the strike. One more fact was alleged. It was that the Deputy Commissioner Solan was present in the court everyday and so the accused did not have confidence in the impartiality of the Magistrate. I have noted these facts from the application of transfer moved by respondent Rattan Kaur.

(3.) Now there was nothing wrong with the Magistrate trying the cases % summarily or for proceeding from day -to -day. There was also nothing wrong with the Deputy Commissioner, Solan, being present in the court. The courts are always open to the public and anyone can watch the proceedings. But if the Magistrate had made the remarks alleged by the applicants, they had a good case for transfer.