High Court Kerala High Court

B.T.Abdul Sathar vs State Of Kerala on 14 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
B.T.Abdul Sathar vs State Of Kerala on 14 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Tr.P(Crl.).No. 51 of 2010()


1. B.T.ABDUL SATHAR, ADVOCATE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. B.T.HAJIRA, AGED 65 YEARS,

3. B.T.KHARARUNNISA AGED 56 YEARS,

4. B.T.ZEENATH, AGED 40 YEARS,D/O.HAJIRA,

5. B.T. UMEES, AGED 38 YEARS,

6. B.T. ASHIQUE, AGED 36 YEARS,

7. B.T. RAUSE, AGED 35 YEARS,

8. MUHAMMED NAJEEB,

9. P.P.K. RASHEEDA, AGED 36 YEARS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :14/12/2010

 O R D E R
             M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
            --------------------------
             Tr.P.(Crl.)No.51 of 2010
            --------------------------

                       ORDER

Petitioner, an Advocate practising in Kannur

courts, who is the 9th accused in C.C.No.338/2008 on

the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s

Court-I, Kannur, filed this petition to order

transfer of the case to another court with a

direction to hear the petitioner before framing

charge, within a specified period, contending that

case is being adjourned, as petitioner is an

Advocate practising in that court, the court has

expressed the view that case is to be transferred.

2. A report was called for from Judicial First

Class Magistrate-I, Kannur. The report shows that

as petitioner is an Advocate and a member of Kannur

Bar Association, who regularly appear before the

court and filed vakalath in several cases, learned

Magistrate addressed Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Thalassery, requesting the court to transfer the

TPCR 51/10 2

case to some other court having jurisdiction and

there is no impediment for the Magistrate to

dispose the matter, except that petitioner is

regularly practising before that court.

3. So far, C.C.No.338/2008 on the file of

Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-I, Kannur

is not transferred to any other court. Therefore, I

find no necessity to issue a direction to hear the

case by any other Magistrate. The fact that one of

the accused is an Advocate practising in that court

need not be a reason for the Magistrate to seek an

order of transfer or refuse to try the case. In

such circumstances, Judicial First Class

Magistrate-I, Kannur is directed to consider the

petition for discharge filed under Section 239 of

Code of Criminal Procedure expeditiously and pass

appropriate order in accordance with law.

Petition is disposed.

14th December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv