Aijaz Ali Qureshi And Others vs The State Of A.P. And Another

Advertisements

Spread the love

Post Views: 329

Case Name:	Aijaz Ali Qureshi And Others vs The State Of A.P. And Another
Equivalent Citation:	Transfer Criminal Petition No.154 of 2012
Date of Judgement:	5 October, 2012
Court:	Andhra High Court
Appellant:	Aijaz Ali Qureshi and others
Respondent:	The State of A.P. and another
Bench:	The Hon’ble Sri Justice G. Krishna Mohan Reddy

FACT OF THE CASE

The case of Aijaz Ali Qureshi And Others vs The State Of A.P. And Another on 5 October, 2012 is about the validity of the order passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, to transfer a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division. The petitioners, who are the accused in the criminal case, challenged the order on the ground that it violated Section 407 (1) © (iii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), which gives the power to the High Court to commit a case to the Court of Session for trial. The respondents, who are the State and the defacto complainant, supported the order on the ground that it was made in the interest of justice and convenience.

ISSUE RAISED

Whether the Metropolitan Sessions Judge had the authority to transfer a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division under Section 408 Cr.P.C.
Whether the transfer of a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division amounts to committal of a case to the Court of Session under Section 407 (1) Cr.P.C.
Whether the High Court has exclusive power to commit a case to the Court of Session for trial under Section 407 (1) © (iii) Cr.P.C.

CONTENTION OF APPELLANT

The appellant challenged the order of transfer passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge on the ground that it violated Section 407 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), which gives the power to the High Court to commit a case to the Court of Session for trial.
The appellant contended that the transfer of a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division under Section 408 Cr.P.C. amounts to committal of a case to the Court of Session under Section 407 (1) Cr.P.C., as they are not two different modes of transferring a case.
The appellant argued that the High Court has exclusive power to commit a case to the Court of Session for trial under Section 407 (1) Cr.P.C., as this provision is applicable when there is no committal order passed by the Magistrate or when such order is defective or invalid. The appellant relied on a decision of the Kerala High Court in C.H. Abdul Salam v Sameera to support this contention.

CONTENTION OF RESPONDENT

The respondent supported the order of transfer passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge on the ground that it was made in the interest of justice and convenience, as the criminal case and the sessions case were arising out of the same incident and involved common witnesses and evidence.
The respondent contended that the transfer of a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division under Section 408 Cr.P.C. does not amount to committal of a case to the Court of Session under Section 407 (1) (iii) Cr.P.C., as they are two different modes of transferring a case.
The respondent argued that the High Court does not have exclusive power to commit a case to the Court of Session for trial under Section 407 (1) (iii) Cr.P.C., as this provision is only applicable when there is no committal order passed by the Magistrate or when such order is defective or invalid.

JUDGEMENT

The judgement of the case of Aijaz Ali Qureshi And Others vs The State Of A.P. And Another on 5 October, 2012 is as follows:

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed the criminal petition filed by the appellant and upheld the order of transfer passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge. The High Court held that the transfer of a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division under Section 408 Cr.P.C. does not amount to committal of a case to the Court of Session under Section 407 (1) (c) (iii) Cr.P.C., as they are two different modes of transferring a case. The High Court also held that the High Court does not have exclusive power to commit a case to the Court of Session for trial under Section 407 (1) (c) (iii) Cr.P.C., as this provision is only applicable when there is no committal order passed by the Magistrate or when such order is defective or invalid. The High Court distinguished the decision of the Kerala High Court in C.H. Abdul Salam v Sameera and observed that it was based on a different factual situation and interpretation of law.

CONCLUSION

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh concluded that the Metropolitan Sessions Judge had the authority to transfer a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division under Section 408 Cr.P.C. and that such transfer did not amount to committal of a case to the Court of Session under Section 407 (1) (c) (iii) Cr.P.C. The High Court also concluded that the High Court did not have exclusive power to commit a case to the Court of Session for trial under Section 407 (1) (c) (iii) Cr.P.C. and that this provision was only applicable when there was no committal order passed by the Magistrate or when such order was defective or invalid. The High Court, therefore, dismissed the criminal petition filed by the appellant and upheld the order of transfer passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge.

written by Shri Vaishnavi intern under legal vidhiya.