State v. Izhar

: Saurabh Tripathi, Shantanu Srivastava : G.A. Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. Today power on behalf of opposite party No.2 has been filed by Shri Amit Rana, learned Advocate which is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Dhreendra Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Shri Shantanu Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Sanjay Kumar Asthana, Advocate holding brief of Shri Amit Rana, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and Shri Kunwar Tejan Bahadur, learned A.G.A for the State.

3. This application has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated

30.09.2025 and transfer the Sessions Trial No. 2123 of 2024 (State V. Izhar @ Raja Ansari and others) in Case Crime No. 229 of 2023 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 342, 364, 377, 504, 51 IPC and 7/8 POCS Act Police Station Nehtaur District Bijnor from the court of Additional District and Session Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO), Bijnor to any other court of district Bijnor.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is the victim of the case and she is wife of the informant of the case and she filed the instant transfer application with the prayer to transfer the trial of the case pending in the Court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor to another competent court on the ground that applicant is not having any hope to get justice from the presiding officer of the present court.

5. He next submits applicant before filing instant transfer application 2 TACR No. 555 of 2025 approached the Sessions Court Bijnor but vide order dated 30.09.2025, learned Sessions Judge dismissed her transfer application. He next submits while dismissing the transfer application of the applicant, learned Sessions Judge failed to appreciate the fact that applicant is having apprehension that she will not get justice from the court where trial is pending but in spite of that learned Sessions Judge dismissed her transfer application.

6. He next submits, from the conduct of the court concerned it reflects court is taking favour of the accused persons. He further argues without taking into custody, court concerned enlarged the accused persons on interim bail and on one date when applicant could not appear before the court concerned due to medical reason then also court issued NBW against her.

7. He next submits, that above facts clearly suggest that applicant cannot get justice from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor.

8. He next submits, therefore trial of the present case should be transferred from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor to any other competent court in the same district.

9. Per contra, learned A.G.A and counsel for the opposite party No.2 opposed the prayer and submit that with a detailed order learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the transfer application filed by the applicant and there is no illegality in the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge and therefore, there is no good ground on the basis of which trial of the case should be transferred from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor to any other court.

10. They further submit, if applicant was aggrieved with the judicial order, then she could challenge the judicial order passed by the trial court before this Court but instead of challenging the judicial order passed by the trial court applicant opted the way to transfer the case which was not permissible.

11. They further submit even from the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge concerned it reflects there is an order of this Court 3 TACR No. 555 of 2025 to decide the trial of the cases relate to provision of POSCO Act within two months and therefore, court concerned issued warrants against witnesses when they failed to appear and therefore, it cannot be said that court concerned committed illegality and the court is against the applicant.

12. They further submit therefore instant transfer application is devoid of merits and it should be dismissed.

13. Heard both the parties and perused the records.

14. By way of instant transfer application applicant who is victim of the case made a prayer to transfer the trial of the case from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act) Bijnor to any other competent court in the same judgeship.

15. From the transfer application filed by applicant it reflects she filed instant transfer application on the ground that she is not having any hope to get justice from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor because Special Judge (POCSO Act) is acting against her and is taking favour of the opposite party No.2 i.e. the accused.

16. As per applicant when on one date due to medical reason she could not appear then also Special Judge (POCSO Act) issued warrant and even without taking into custody Special Judge enlarged the opposite party No.2 on interim bail.

17. In considered view of this Court on the above grounds it cannot be said that court concerned is biased with the applicant and is taking favour of the accused.

18. In view of this Court if applicant was aggrieved with the judicial order passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act) then she could challenge those orders but instead of challenging those orders passed by the trial court she filed transfer application.

19. Further even from the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor it reflects in the light of the order passed by this Court, learned Special Judge (POCSO Act was trying to expedite the 4 TACR No. 555 of 2025 proceedings of the case as this Court had directed that the matter relates to POCSO Act should be decided within two months. Considering these facts if on a particular date witness failed to appear and court concerned issued warrants against him, then it cannot be said that court concerned is against the informant side and is taking favour of the accused persons.

19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above, in my view there is no good ground on the basis of which the instant transfer application should be allowed.

20. Therefore, the instant transfer application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

21. Accordingly, instant transfer application is dismissed. November 21, 2025 Nadeem (Sameer Jain,J.)

: Saurabh Tripathi, Shantanu Srivastava : G.A. Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. Today power on behalf of opposite party No.2 has been filed by Shri Amit Rana, learned Advocate which is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Dhreendra Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Shri Shantanu Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Sanjay Kumar Asthana, Advocate holding brief of Shri Amit Rana, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and Shri Kunwar Tejan Bahadur, learned A.G.A for the State.

3. This application has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated

30.09.2025 and transfer the Sessions Trial No. 2123 of 2024 (State V. Izhar @ Raja Ansari and others) in Case Crime No. 229 of 2023 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 342, 364, 377, 504, 51 IPC and 7/8 POCS Act Police Station Nehtaur District Bijnor from the court of Additional District and Session Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO), Bijnor to any other court of district Bijnor.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is the victim of the case and she is wife of the informant of the case and she filed the instant transfer application with the prayer to transfer the trial of the case pending in the Court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor to another competent court on the ground that applicant is not having any hope to get justice from the presiding officer of the present court.

5. He next submits applicant before filing instant transfer application 2 TACR No. 555 of 2025 approached the Sessions Court Bijnor but vide order dated 30.09.2025, learned Sessions Judge dismissed her transfer application. He next submits while dismissing the transfer application of the applicant, learned Sessions Judge failed to appreciate the fact that applicant is having apprehension that she will not get justice from the court where trial is pending but in spite of that learned Sessions Judge dismissed her transfer application.

6. He next submits, from the conduct of the court concerned it reflects court is taking favour of the accused persons. He further argues without taking into custody, court concerned enlarged the accused persons on interim bail and on one date when applicant could not appear before the court concerned due to medical reason then also court issued NBW against her.

7. He next submits, that above facts clearly suggest that applicant cannot get justice from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor.

8. He next submits, therefore trial of the present case should be transferred from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor to any other competent court in the same district.

9. Per contra, learned A.G.A and counsel for the opposite party No.2 opposed the prayer and submit that with a detailed order learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the transfer application filed by the applicant and there is no illegality in the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge and therefore, there is no good ground on the basis of which trial of the case should be transferred from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor to any other court.

10. They further submit, if applicant was aggrieved with the judicial order, then she could challenge the judicial order passed by the trial court before this Court but instead of challenging the judicial order passed by the trial court applicant opted the way to transfer the case which was not permissible.

11. They further submit even from the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge concerned it reflects there is an order of this Court 3 TACR No. 555 of 2025 to decide the trial of the cases relate to provision of POSCO Act within two months and therefore, court concerned issued warrants against witnesses when they failed to appear and therefore, it cannot be said that court concerned committed illegality and the court is against the applicant.

12. They further submit therefore instant transfer application is devoid of merits and it should be dismissed.

13. Heard both the parties and perused the records.

14. By way of instant transfer application applicant who is victim of the case made a prayer to transfer the trial of the case from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act) Bijnor to any other competent court in the same judgeship.

15. From the transfer application filed by applicant it reflects she filed instant transfer application on the ground that she is not having any hope to get justice from the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bijnor because Special Judge (POCSO Act) is acting against her and is taking favour of the opposite party No.2 i.e. the accused.

16. As per applicant when on one date due to medical reason she could not appear then also Special Judge (POCSO Act) issued warrant and even without taking into custody Special Judge enlarged the opposite party No.2 on interim bail.

17. In considered view of this Court on the above grounds it cannot be said that court concerned is biased with the applicant and is taking favour of the accused.

18. In view of this Court if applicant was aggrieved with the judicial order passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act) then she could challenge those orders but instead of challenging those orders passed by the trial court she filed transfer application.

19. Further even from the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor it reflects in the light of the order passed by this Court, learned Special Judge (POCSO Act was trying to expedite the 4 TACR No. 555 of 2025 proceedings of the case as this Court had directed that the matter relates to POCSO Act should be decided within two months. Considering these facts if on a particular date witness failed to appear and court concerned issued warrants against him, then it cannot be said that court concerned is against the informant side and is taking favour of the accused persons.

19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above, in my view there is no good ground on the basis of which the instant transfer application should be allowed.

20. Therefore, the instant transfer application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

21. Accordingly, instant transfer application is dismissed. November 21, 2025 Nadeem (Sameer Jain,J.)