Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 91902 (ALL)

ARDHENDU SHEKHAR TRIPATHI v. STATE OF U.P.

TACR/433/2025 · 2025-09-07

Manoj Bajaj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 433 of 2025 Court No. - 81 HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J. Applicant has filed this application under Section 447 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking transfer of Session Trial No.293 of 2024, titled State Vs. Ardhendu Shekhar Tripathi, arising out of Case Crime No.1 of 2024, under Sections 302 IPC and Section 30 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Lalpur/Pandeypur, District Varanasi, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, court no.14, Varanasi to Prayagraj or Gorakhpur. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the trial for alleged commission of offence of murder is pending against the applicant- accused, wherein prosecution has examined five witnesses. He further submits upon an application moved by the applicant's wife, the appearance of the accused was permitted through video conferencing, but previously whenever the applicant appeared before the court the trial proceedings were witnessed by various advocates. According to him, even the defence counsel representing the applicant has been given threats, and it is apprehended that at the stage of recording the explanation of the accused under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, he may suffer harm, therefore, learned counsel prays for transfer of the trial to competent court of jurisdiction at district Prayagraj or Gorakhpur. After hearing the learned counsel and considering his submissions, this Court finds that the application seeking transfer of the trial is founded upon presumptions and no material regarding threats to the accused- applicant has been produced. Concededly, the counsel representing the applicant- accused before the trial court has never made any grievance or complaint in respect of alleged threats, either before the trial court or any other competent Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, Mohd Abdul Moid Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ardhendu Shekhar Tripathi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) authority. Similarly, the accused has also not raised any grievance before the trial court. The ground raised is hypothetical, therefore, this court has no hesitation in holding that the application seeking transfer of the trial is without any cause of action. Resultantly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed with a cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited in the account of High Court Legal Services Authority, Allahabad. September 8, 2025 Raj TACR No. 433 of 2025 2 (Manoj Bajaj,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad