IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Tr.P(Crl.).No. 29 of 2008()
1. P.MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 62 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB
... Respondent
2. KIZHAKKEVEETTIL PREMA, AGED 34 YEARS,
3. AMACHANDRAN, AGED 35 YEARS,
4. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :29/04/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Tr.P.(Crl) No. 29 OF 2008
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 29th day of April, 2008
O R D E R
Application for transfer. Petitioner faces indictment
in a prosecution for the offences punishable under section
377 read with 511 IPC. The trial has already commenced.
Some witnesses were examined.
2. At that stage, the petitioner went before the
Sessions court to complain that he may not get justice at the
hands of the presiding officer. The said application for
transfer was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge by a
detailed order, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-A2.
3. His application for transfer having been dismissed
by the learned Sessions Judge, the petitioner has come
before this Court now with a prayer that there may be a
direction for transfer.
4. What is the ground for transfer? It is contended
TPCR.29/08
: 2 :
that the matter has been settled between the parties but the
learned Magistrate is refusing to accept such settlement.
The learned Magistrate is insisting that the witnesses must
conform to their statements given in the case diary. It is in
these circumstances that the petitioner reiterates the prayer
for transfer of the case.
5. I have gone through the order passed by the
learned Sessions Judge. I find the learned Sessions Judge
has considered all the aspects of the matter. The
apprehension of the petitioner, who admittedly was not
present on the date of examination of the witnesses, that the
witnesses were intimidated by the Magistrate to compel them
to conform to their case diary statements was found by the
learned Sessions Judge to be without any basis or merit.
6. I totally concur with the conclusion of the learned
Sessions Judge. There is absolutely no merit to sail to a
conclusion that the apprehension of the petitioner that he may
not get justice at the hands of the learned Magistrate who is
TPCR.29/08
: 3 :
now trying the case has any substance. I am satisfied, in
these circumstances, that this petition deserves to be
dismissed. The learned Magistrate evidently was not
prepared to accept the composition of a non-compoundable
offence and that appears to be prompting the petitioner to
make these applications for transfer.
7. This petition is accordingly dismissed.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
aks