Delhi High Court
Sudesh Chhikara vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) And Anr on 17 March, 2025
Author: Dinesh Kumar Sharma
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Sharma
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
RESERVED ON - 02.12.2024
% PRONOUNCED ON - 17.03.2025.
+ CRL.M.C. 6572/2024, CRL.M.A. 25124/2024
SUDESH CHHIKARA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jaipal Singh, Adv.
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State.
Mr.Kanhaiya Singhal, Amicus Curiae
along with Mr.Ujwal Ghai, Mr. Pulkit
Jolly and Ms. Tamanna Agarwal,
Advs.
Mr. Baljit Singh, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J :
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred as BNSS)
challenging the order dated 07.06.2024 passed by the Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), West Delhi in Case M- 17/2024
titled Baljeet Singh vs. Sudesh Chhikara. Learned ACMM vide the
impugned order, upon a transfer application filed by Respondent no.2,
transferred the complaint case bearing CC No. 6895/2019 from theCRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 1 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
court of learned MM-07, West, Tis Hazari Court to the Court of
learned MM-02 (Mahila Court), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi wherein
another connected matter bearing MC No.533/2020 was pending
adjudication between the parties.
2. Shorn of the details, Respondent No.2 is the father-in-law of the
Petitioner and they are locked in several litigations pertaining to
matrimonial disputes between the Petitioner and son of Respondent
No.2. The present petition has been filed predominantly on the ground
that under Section 410 Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 ( hereinafter
referred as Cr.PC), the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has no power to transfer a case from one
criminal Court to another criminal Court in its jurisdiction. The
petitioner has submitted that as per Section 19(3) of the Cr.PC., the
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has jurisdiction only to the extent of
distribution of business among the Metropolitan Magistrate. It has also
been submitted that Ld. ACMM did not even issue notice before
passing the impugned order.
3. The question involved in the present petition is relating to the power of
the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate/Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate relating to transfer of case from one Court of Metropolitan
Magistrate to another Court of Metropolitan Magistrate. Since the case
was of importance, this Court appointed Sh. Kanhaiya Singhal,
Advocate as an Amicus Curiae. The Court records appreciation for Sh.
Kanhaiya Singhal, Advocate who rendered the able assistance to the
Court.
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 2 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
4. Before proceeding further it is necessary to examine the relevant
provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Bhartiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read as
under;
“Section 12 Chief Judicial Magistrate and Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, etc.
1. In every district (not being a metropolitan area), the High
Court shall appoint a Judicial Magistrate of the first class
to be the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
2. The High Court may appoint any Judicial Magistrate of
the first class to be an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
and such Magistrate shall have all or any of the powers of a
Chief Judicial Magistrate under this Code or under any
other law for the time being in force as the High Court may
direct.
3. (a)The High Court may designate any Judicial
Magistrate of the first class in any sub-division as the Sub-
divisional Judicial Magistrate and relieve him of the
responsibilities specified in this section as occasion
requires.
(b) Subject to the general control of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, every Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate shall
also have and exercise, such powers of supervision and
control over the work of the Judicial Magistrates (other
than Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates) in the sub-
division as the High Court may, by general or special order,
specify in this behalf.
Section 15. Subordination of Judicial Magistrates.
1. Every Chief Judicial Magistrate shall be subordinate to
the Sessions Judge; and every other Judicial Magistrate
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 3 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
shall, subject to the general control of the Sessions Judge,
be subordinate to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate may, from time to time,
make rules or give special orders, consistent with this Code,
as to the distribution of business among the Judicial
Magistrates subordinate to him.
Section 17. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.
1. The High Court shall, in relation to every metropolitan
area within its local jurisdiction, appoint a Metropolitan
Magistrate to be the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for such
metropolitan area.
2. The High Court may appoint any Metropolitan
Magistrate to be an Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, and such Magistrate shall have all or any of the
powers of a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under this Code
or under any other law for the time being in force as the
High Court may direct.
Section 19. Subordination of Metropolitan Magistrates.
1. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and every Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate shall be subordinate to the
Sessions Judge; and every other Metropolitan Magistrate
shall, subject to the general control of the Sessions Judge,
be subordinate to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.
2. The High Court may, for the purposes of this Code,
define the extent of the subordination, if any, of the
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrates to the Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate.
3. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate may, from time to
time, make rules or give special orders, consistent with this
Code, as to the distribution of business among the
Metropolitan Magistrates and as to the allocation of
business to an Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 4 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
Section 410. Withdrawal of cases by Judicial Magistrate.
1. Any Chief Judicial Magistrate may withdraw any case
from, or recall any case which he has made over to, any
Magistrate subordinate to him, and may inquire into or try
such case himself, or refer it for inquiry or trial to any other
such Magistrate competent to inquire into or try the same.
2. Any Judicial Magistrate may recall any case made over
by him under sub-section (2) of section 192 to any other
Magistrate and may inquire into or try such cases himself.
Relevant provisions Of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023
Section 10. Chief Judicial Magistrate and Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate (Pari Materia to Sec 12 Cr.p.c)
1. In every district, the High Court shall appoint a Judicial
Magistrate of the first class to be the Chief Judicial
Magistrate.
2. The High Court may appoint any Judicial Magistrate of
the first class to be an Additional Chief Judicial magistrate,
and such Magistrate shall have all or any of the powers of a
Chief Judicial Magistrate under this Sanhita or under any
other law for the time being in force as the High Court may
direct.
3. The High Court may designate any Judicial Magistrate of
the first class in any sub-division as the Sub-divisional
Judicial Magistrate and relieve him of the responsibilities
specified in this section as occasion requires.
4. Subject to the general control of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, every Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate shall
also have and exercise, such powers of supervision and
control over the work of the Judicial Magistrates (other
than Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates) in the sub-
division as the High Court may, by general or special order,
specify in this behalf.
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 5 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
Section 13. Subordination of Judicial Magistrates
(1) Every Chief Judicial Magistrate shall be subordinate to
the Sessions Judge; and every other Judicial Magistrate
shall, subject to the general control of the Sessions Judge,
be subordinate to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
(2) The Chief Judicial Magistrate may, from time to time,
make rules or give special orders, consistent with this
Sanhita, as to the distribution of business among the
Judicial Magistrates subordinate to him
Section 450. Withdrawal of cases by Judicial Magistrates.
1. Any Chief Judicial Magistrate may withdraw any case
from, or recall any case which he has made over to, any
Magistrate subordinate to him, and may inquire into or try
such case himself, or refer it for inquiry or trial to any other
such Magistrate competent to inquire into or try the same.
2. Any Judicial Magistrate may recall any case made over
by him under sub-section (2) of section 212 to any other
Magistrate and may inquire into or try such cases himself.”
5. Before proceeding further it is also necessary to refer to the power
conferred to the Supreme Court, High Courts and Sessions Courts for
transfer of the Criminal Cases under Chapter-XXXIII BNSS 2023 and
under Chapter-XXXI of Cr.PC, 1973. Section 406 Cr.PC and Section
446 BNSS, 2023 confers power upon the Supreme Court to transfer
any particular case or appeal from one High Court to another High
Court or from Criminal Court subordinate to one High Court to another
Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction subordinate to another
High Court by an order under this section, if it is expedient for the
interest of justice. Similarly, Section 407 Cr.PC and Section 447
BNSS, 2023 confers power upon High Court to transfer cases and
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 6 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
appeal, if (i) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in
any Criminal Court subordinate thereto, or; (ii) that some question of
law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise, or (iii) that an order under
this section is required by any provision of this Code or will tend to the
general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the
ends of justice.
6. Section 408 Cr.P.C. and Section 448 BNSS 2023 confers power upon
Sessions Judge to pass an order of transfer if it is expedient for the ends
of justice, of any particular case from one Criminal Court to another
Criminal Court in his sessions division. It is pertinent to mention here
that the High Court and the Sessions Judge may exercise its jurisdiction
on the report of the lower Court or on the application of a party interest
or on its own initiative. Thus, the Code of Criminal Procedure has
specifically conferred the power upon Supreme Court, High Court and
Sessions Court of transfer of cases. Section 409 and 410 Cr.PC and
Section 449 and 450 BNSS 2023 have conferred power of withdrawal
of cases and appeal by the Session Judges and the Judicial Magistrates
respectively. The basic question is whether the Chief Judicial
Magistrate has the power to transfer the case from one Court to another
Court on an application being moved or on its own.
7. Before proceeding further it is also necessary to refer to the power to be
exercised by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. It is
pertinent to mention here that in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, Section 10 (2) provides that the High Court may appoint
any Judicial Magistrate of the first class to be an Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, and such Magistrate shall have all or any of the
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 7 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
powers of a Chief Judicial Magistrate under this Sanhita or under any
other law for the time being in force as the High Court may direct.
Thus in this regard, the High Court in its administrative side is required
to pass an order under Section 10(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 as to the extent of power of an Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate.
8. Section 13(2) of BNSS, 2023 also makes it clear that the Chief Judicial
Magistrate has been authorised as to the distribution of business among
the Judicial Magistrates subordinate to him. The legislature in its
wisdom has not conferred this power on the Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, therefore, in absence of any special order from the High
Court only the Chief Judicial Magistrate has been made empowered as
to the distribution of business.
9. It is pertinent to mention here that the subordination of the Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate to the Chief Judicial Magistrate is only in
regard to the administrative functions. In regard to the judicial
functions, Section 10(2) specifically provides that the Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate shall have all the powers of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate. In this regard, reference can also be made to R.D. Jain &
Co. vs. Capital First Ltd. & Ors., (2023) 1 SCC 675 wherein it was
inter alia held that the judicial powers and powers under the Cr.PC
which may be exercised by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, can be
exercised by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate also. It is
pertinent to mention here that it was further inter alia held that
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate can be said to be at par with
the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in so far as the powers to be
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 8 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
exercised under the Cr.PC are concerned. The Apex Court further inter
alia stated that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in addition, may have
administrative powers, however, for all other purposes and more
particularly the powers to be exercised under the Cr.PC both are at par.
The Apex court concluded that therefore the Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate cannot be said to be subordinate to the Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate in so far as exercise of judicial powers are
concerned. Thus it is no more res integra that as far as judicial powers
are concerned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate is not subordinate
to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. However, in relation to the
administrative functions to be exercised by the Chief Judicial
Magistrate under the BNSS, 2023, the same can be exercised by
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate only to the extent, an order to this
effect is passed by the High Court. In this regard reference may again
be made to Section 10(2) BNSS, 2023 which inter alia provides that an
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate “shall have all or any of the
powers of a Chief Judicial Magistrate”, “as the High Court may direct”.
Thus the legislature in its wisdom has not conferred “all” powers and
stated that “all or any of the powers”. Any word in the legislature
cannot be considered to be superfluous ordinarily. Therefore, an order
of the High Court in its administrative side is required to be passed
regarding “All or any of the powers” to be exercised by the Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate.
10. Now coming to the core question that whether the Chief Judicial
Magistrate has the power to transfer the case from one Court to another
while exercising its power under Section 410 Cr.P.C./Section 450
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 9 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
BNSS, 2023. In this regard, High court of Karnataka in M/s Radical
Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Sri Padmanabh T.G, in Crl.P. No. 1291/2023, A. K.
Singh, Special Railway Magistrate, Jabalpur vs. Virendra Kumar
Jain, Advocate- MANU/MP/0623/1999 : 2001 (4) M.P.L.J. 324,
Chandrkantbhai Bhaichandbhai Sharma vs. State of Gujarat and
Another in Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No.4884/2015
and Mahfooskhan Mehboob Sheikh vs. R. J. Parakh-
MANU/MH/0304/1979 : LAWS(BOM)-1979-11-8, the Court inter
alia held as under:
“6. Chapter XXXI of Cr.P.C. provides for Transfer of
Criminal Cases. Section 406 of Cr.P.C. in the said Chapter
provides for the power of Supreme Court to transfer cases
and appeals from one High Court to another High Court or
from a Criminal Court subordinate to one High Court to
another Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction
subordinate to another High Court. Section 407 of Cr.P.C.
provides for power of High Court to transfer cases and
appeals as provided therein. However, no application for
transfer of a case from one Criminal Court to another
Criminal Court in the same sessions division shall be
entertained by the High Court unless an application for
transfer has been made to the Sessions Judge and rejected
by him. Section 408 of Cr.P.C. provides for power of the
Sessions Judge to transfer cases and appeals from one
Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in his sessions
division. Sections 409 and 410 of Cr.P.C. deals with the
powers of the Sessions Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate
or Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for withdrawal of the
cases/appeals. Section 411 of Cr.P.C. provides for making
over or withdrawal of cases by Executive Magistrates and
Section 412 of Cr.P.C. provides that a Sessions Judge or
Magistrate making an order under Sections 408, 409, 410
or Section 411 of Cr.P.C. shall record his reasons for
making it.
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 10 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
7. In the present case, an application has been filed by
respondent herein before the Court of Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru, for transfer of two cases which were
pending before two different Courts of Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate. The Court of Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate in exercise of his power under Section 410 of
Cr.P.C. has allowed the prayer made by the respondent
herein and has ordered transfer of the two criminal cases
pending before two different Courts of Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrates to another Court of Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.
8. The power of Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 410 of Cr.P.C. for
transferring of pending criminal cases from one Court of
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to another Court
of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was
considered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the
case of A. K. Singh (supra) and in paragraphs No.10 and
11, it is observed as follows:-
“10……The Chief Judicial Magistrate appears to have
committed severe illegalities; firstly, the transfer
petition moved before him was under section 410,
Criminal Procedure Code, Under that provision the
jurisdiction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate is
administrative in nature. It is to keep equilibrium of
cases amongst the various Magistrates working under
him in the district. He can withdraw cases from one
Magistrate and send them to another. This provision
does not empower a Chief Judicial Magistrate to
exercise power of transfer on complaint by one of the
parties. For that, the remedy to the aggrieved party is
under section 408, Criminal Procedure Code. That
power is exercised by the Sessions Judge. He can
transfer cases from one criminal Court to another in
his Session Division ‘when he considers it expedient to
do so for the ends of Justice’. He can transfer a
particular case from one court to another. He may actCRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 11 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
either on the report of the lower court or on the
application of the party interested or on his own
initiative. So, this is the provision which provides
remedy to an aggrieved person, who feels to have lost
faith in a particular criminal court for one or other
reason. His remedy is not under section 410, Criminal
Procedure Code.
11. In view of this scope of provisions of sections 408
and 410, Criminal Procedure Code the Chief Judicial
Magistrate should not have acted on a transfer petition
based on grievances against the trying Magistrate. The
best course was to leave the complainant to move the
Sessions Court under section 408, Criminal Procedure
Code.”
9. The High Court of Gujarat in the case of Chandrkantbhai
Bhaichandbhai Sharma (supra) in paragraphs No.16 and
21, has observed as follows:-
“16. Sections 406, 407 and 408 respectively relate to
the power of the Supreme Court, High Court and
Sessions Judge to transfer cases and appeals. On the
other hand, Sections 409. 410(1) and (2) and 411
relate to withdrawal of cases or recalling of cases
which had been made over by the Sessions Judge,
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Judicial Magistrate and the
Executive Magistrate, for being thereafter tried either
by himself or being made over to another Court for
trial. The clear contrast in the language employed by
the Legislature in the two sets of section is indicative of
the difference in the nature of the power conferred
thereunder. I note below the differences:
(i) Sections 406, 407 and 408 use the words “whenever
it is made to appear” while referring to the power of
the Supreme Court, High Court or the Sessions Judge
to transfer cases. Sections 409. 410 and 411
significantly do not use these words.
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 12 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
(ii) The captions of Sections 406, 407 and 408 speak of
exercise of ‘power’ to transfer, Sections 409, 410 and
411 do not speak of ‘power’ but merely refer to
‘withdrawal’ or ‘recalling’.
(iii) Sections 406, 407 and 408 contemplate the ‘power
to transfer’ being exercised on an application by a
‘party interested’ (Sections 407 and 408 also
contemplate the ‘power to transfer’ being used on a
report of the Lower Court or suo motu; and Section
406 contemplate the power of transfer being used on
an application by the Attorney General). These
Sections clearly imply a need for hearing before
transfer. On the other hand, Sections 409, 410 and 411
contemplate exercise of the power of
withdrawal/recalling cases in a routine manner in the
day to day administration. They do not contemplate
any hearing to the parties interested.
It is clear from the above that the power to be exercised
under Sections 406, 407 and 408 is a judicial power to be
invoked and exercised in the manner state therein. On the
other hand, the power of withdrawing or recalling of cases
under Sections 409, 410 and 411 is an administrative
power, complementary to the administrative power of
making over cases vested in the Chief Judicial
Magistrate/Magistrate and the Sessions Judge under
Sections 192 and 194 of the Code.
XXXX
21. In view of the above discussion, the position may be
summarized thus:
(a) A Sessions Judge in exercise of judicial power under
Section 408 of the Code may transfer any case pending
before any Criminal Court in his Sessions Division to any
other Criminal Court in his Sessions Division. That would
mean that he can transfer even those cases where the trial
has commenced from one Additional Sessions Judge in hisCRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 13 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
Sessions Division. The transfer of a case under Section 408
of the Code being in exercise of a judicial power, it should
be preceded by a hearing to the parties interested. Further,
the reason or why it is expedient for the ends of justice to
transfer the case, has to be recorded.
(b) The judicial power under Section 408(1) and the
administrative power under Section 409(1) and (2) are
distinct and different and Section 408 is not controlled by
Section 409(2). A sessions Judge in exercise of his
administrative power under Section 409 may:
(i) withdraw any case or appeal from any Assistant
Sessions Judge or Chief Judicial Magistrate
subordinate to him;
(ii) recall any case or appeal which he has made over
to any Assistant Sessions Judge or Chief Judicial
Magistrate subordinate to him;
(iii) recall any case or appeal which he has made over
to any Additional Sessions Judge, before trial of such
case or hearing of such appeal has commenced before
such Judge and try the case or hear the appeal himself
or make it over to another Court for trial or hearing in
accordance with the provisions of the Code. NO
hearing need be granted to any one before exercising
such power. But the reason therefore shall have to be
recorded having regard to Section 412.”
10. The judgment in the case of Mahfooskhan Mehboob
Sheikh (supra) rendered by the High Court of Bombay
cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case
as the said judgment was rendered in the background that a
Notification under Section 19(2) of Cr.P.C. was issued by
the High Court of Bombay defining the extent of
subordination of the Courts of Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrates to the Court of Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate. However, the same is not the
position in the present case as no such Notification is issued
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 14 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
by this Court. In addition to the same, I am not in
agreement with the reasoning assigned by the High Court of
Bombay holding that the Court of Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate is empowered under Section 410 of Cr.P.C. to
entertain an application seeking transfer not only on the
administrative ground but also on the judicial ground.
11. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh and High Court of
Gujarat in the case of A. K. Singh (supra) and
Chandrkantbhai Bhaichandbhai Sharma (supra) have laid
down the correct position of law and I am in complete
agreement with the same. Under the circumstances, I am of
the opinion that the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru, in exercise of his power under Section 410 of
Cr.P.C. could not have passed the order impugned.
Therefore, the said order cannot be sustained. Accordingly,
the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated
13.01.2023 passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru in Crl. Misc. No.5901/2022 is set- aside.”
11. This Court considers that the view taken by the High Court of
Karnataka in M/s Radical Works Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) and the view taken
by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in A. K. Singh, Special Railway
Magistrate, Jabalpur (Supra) and the High Court of Gujarat in
Chandrkantbhai Bhaichandbhai Sharma (Supra) is in sync with the
provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Court is of the firm view
that since the legislature in its own wisdom has conferred the
power of the transfer only to Supreme Court, High Courts and the
Sessions Court, it cannot be given by way of inference to the
Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate. The law of interpretation does
not provide interpretation of any provision which in any manner
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 15 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
contravenes the intention of the legislature. The legislature could
have specifically given the power of transfer to the Chief Judicial
Magistrate if it would have considered it proper to do so. Thus, the
Court finds itself to be fully in agreement with the view taken by
the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in A. K. Singh, Special Railway
Magistrate, Jabalpur (Supra) followed by the High Court of Gujarat in
Chandrkantbhai Bhaichandbhai Sharma (Supra) and the High Court
of Karnataka in M/s Radical Works Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). Even otherwise,
the present impugned order has to go as the learned Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate did not even consider it necessary to issue the
notice before passing the impugned order.
12. In these facts and circumstances, on the basis of the discussions made
herein above, the Court passes the following directions:
(i) under Section 410 Cr.PC. and Section 450 BNSS the power
conferred upon the Chief Judicial Magistrate is only
administrative in nature. The Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate
cannot “transfer” a case from one Court or another upon an
application being moved or suo moto.
(ii) the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot exercise the
administrative power of transfer of case from one Court to another
within its jurisdiction unless an order is passed by the High Court
under Section 10(2) BNSS, 2023.
(iii) the Respondent No.2 shall be at liberty to move a proper
application before Ld. Principal District and Sessions Judge under
Section 448 BNSS, 2023 for transfer of case from one Court toCRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 16 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25
another. Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge may
exercise the jurisdiction without being influenced by the order of
this Court in accordance with law.
(vi) The copy of the order be sent to Ld. Registrar General for
appropriate action and circulation of copy of judgment to the
judicial officers subject to the directions of Hon’ble the Chief
Justice.
13. The present petition along with pending application(s), if any, stands
disposed of.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
MARCH 17, 2025
Ankit/KR
CRL.M.C. 6572/2024 Page 17 of 17
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:17.03.2025
19:27:25