Ravindra Nath Kakkar, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for applicant as well as leaned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
(2.) This transfer application has been moved under Section 407 Cr.P.C. to transfer the S. T. No. 35 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 6 of 2017, under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and 30 Arms Act, State Vs. Kunwar Vivesh and others, pending in the Court of Session Judge, Chandauli, District- Chandauli to any other District of Uttar Pradesh except the Districts Varanasi and Chandauli.
(3.) Submission raised by the counsel for the applicant is that F.I.R. dated 13.01.2017 was lodged against the applicant and his two sons by the respondent no. 2 vide Case Crime No. 6 of 2017, under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Sayyed Raja, District-Chandauli. It is further submitted that after completion of the investigation, charge sheet under Section 302/34 I.P.C., 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and 30 Arms Act was submitted. Next submission is that Bar Association, Chandauli held meeting on 18.05.2017 for passing order against Sri Yogendra Singh, Advocate, Civil Court Chandauli. As the deceased are Advocates no one has given consent to file Vakalatnama on behalf of applicant. On 19.05.2017 Joint Bar Association, Chandauli passed a proposal no any counsel of Bar Association, Chandauli will appear for accused/applicant in Case Crime No. 06 of 2017 registered at PS- Saiyadraja, District-Chandauli. On 20.05.2017 Joint Bar Association Chandauli passed a Prastav about Sri Yogendra Singh who has filed Parcha in Bail Application on behalf of applicant. Thereafter, Sri Yogendra Singh withdrew his Vakalatnama. It is next contended that due to non-availability of the local member of the Bar the bail application pending before the concerned court was argued in person by the accused-applicant. Further, the charge was framed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused persons. It is next contended that at the time of framing of charge against the accused legal assistance could not be obtained due to the joint resolution of the Bar Association, Chandauli. In order to substantiate the above arguments, a copy of the resolution of the Bar Association, Chandauli has been annexed as annexure-6 alongwith the application.;