Bose, J. - (1.) This is an unusual application asking for a transfer of certain contempt proceedings from Pepsu High Court to any other High Court and, in the alternative, asking that at least the matter should not be heard by two of the Judges of that High Court who are named. This at once raises a question about our jurisdiction to order such a transfer.
(2.) The learned counsel for the applicant relied on Section 527 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Briefly his reasoning was this. Section 527 authorises the transfer of any "case" from one High Court to another whenever if is made to appear to the Supreme Court that such transfer is expedient for the ends of justice. The word "case" is not defined but" offence" is defined in Section 4 (O) to mean "any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force". Contempt is punishable under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952; therefore it is an offence punishable by a law which is in force; consequently it is an offence. Being an offence it is triable under the Criminal Procedure Code because Section 5 makes the Code applicable not only to the trial of offence under the Indian Penal Code but also to the trial of offences against "other laws". As it is matter triable under the Criminal Procedure Code, it must be a "case" within the meaning of Section 527 and accordingly the Section can be invoked here.
(3.) We are unable to agree. In our opinion, the power of a High Court to institute proceedings for contempt and punish where necessary is a special jurisdiction which is inherent in all Courts of Record and Section 1(2) of the Code expressly excludes special jurisdictions from its scope. The Section runs " In the absence of any specific provision to the contrary, nothing herein contained shall affect any special ..... law now in force or any special jurisdiction or power conferred, by any other law for the time being in force.";