PRUSHOTAM YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is an accused in Sessions Trial No. 82 of 2020, has filed the present application, under Sec. 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for setting aside the order, dtd. 10/5/2022, passed in Misc. Transfer Case No. 76 of 2022, whereby the records of Sessions Trial No. 82 of 2020 has been transferred from 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Naugachia Sub-Division, Bhagalpur, to 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, at the instance of the informant/Opposite Party No. 2.

(2.) The main submission advanced by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the record of Sessions Trial No. 82 of 2020 has been transferred without any notice to the petitioner by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur. The prayer for transfer of the records of Sessions Trial No. 82 of 2020 from Naugachia to Bhagalpur at the instance of the informant/Opposite Party No. 2 was dismissed earlier on three occasions on identical facts by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur. In support of his argument, learned Senior Counsel relies upon a decision of the Supreme Court, in the case of Nirmal Singh v. State of Haryana, reported in (1996) 6 SCC 126.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel also argued that Sec. 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, bars the jurisdiction of the criminal court to review the order and judgment, which has already been rendered. He also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court, in the case of State of Punjab v. Divinder Pal Singh Bhullar and Others, reported in (2011) 14 SCC 770.