Skip to content


Ravi Chander Sahai and ors. Vs. Sunder Singh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1925All640; 87Ind.Cas.112
AppellantRavi Chander Sahai and ors.
RespondentSunder Singh
Excerpt:
- - it offends against the rule that this court will not ordinarily entertain an application for a relief which could equally well be granted by a subordinate court until recourse has first been had to that court. the reasons given in support of the application are not particularly strong especially in view of the explanation which the magistrate has submitted, but as only two witnesses have been examined in the case, as the application is not opposed, and as the magistrate concerned says that he has no objection whatever to the case being transferred......v. raghubar (1913) 11 a.l.j. 741. in this case the transfer applied for could be granted by the district magistrate under section 528(2) of the code of criminal procedure. admittedly no application has so far been made to the magistrate. if this fact had been brought to the notice of the court at the time when the application was filed i have no doubt that it would have been rejected at the outset.2. as notices have now gone and the matter has been argued it is perhaps unnecessary to do now what i should ordinarily do in such a case, namely to reject the application until such time as the applicant had first applied to the district magistrate. the reasons given in support of the application are not particularly strong especially in view of the explanation which the magistrate has.....
Judgment:

Daniels, J.

1. There is one grave objection to this application which is for the transfer of a case pending in the Court of the Magistrate, First Class, of Hamirpur district to the Court of any other Magistrate in that District. It offends against the rule that this Court will not ordinarily entertain an application for a relief which could equally well be granted by a Subordinate Court until recourse has first been had to that Court. This rule has been repeatedly laid down with reference to applications for revision and it was laid down with special reference to applications for transfer by the lute Sir George Knox at the conclusion of his judgment in Muneshar v. Raghubar (1913) 11 A.L.J. 741. In this case the transfer applied for could be granted by the District Magistrate under Section 528(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Admittedly no application has so far been made to the Magistrate. If this fact had been brought to the notice of the Court at the time when the application was filed I have no doubt that it would have been rejected at the outset.

2. As notices have now gone and the matter has been argued it is perhaps unnecessary to do now what I should ordinarily do in such a case, namely to reject the application until such time as the applicant had first applied to the District Magistrate. The reasons given in support of the application are not particularly strong especially in view of the explanation which the Magistrate has submitted, but as only two witnesses have been examined in the case, as the application is not opposed, and as the Magistrate concerned says that he has no objection whatever to the case being transferred. I direct that it be transferred to any other Magistrate to whom the District Magistrate may make it over.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //