Gopal Krishan Vyas, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner - accused is facing trail in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh along with other co - accused persons for offences under Sections 363, 366, 342 and 376, I.P.C. The trial of the case is going on. The petitioner filed an application for transfer of the case while raising objections that during the course of trial, the learned Sessions Judge has taken upon himself to conduct the trial of the case and when statement of witnesses were recorded the trial Judge himself conducted the examination - in - chief of the witnesses instead of the Public Prosecutor. A specific objection was made before the learned Sessions Judge when the proceedings of the trial were going on on 04.05.2010 by way of written application. In the application, it was specifically requested to learned Sessions Judge that Public Prosecutor has been appointed to conduct the trial and, if at all, learned Sessions Judge wished to ask certain questions to the witnesses same could be asked by way of court questions. The petitioner has placed on record the said application as Annex. - 1. Another application was filed by the petitioner on 07.06.2010 for seeking time to file transfer application for transfer of the case before this Court. The said application along with affidavit runs as follows : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... In the above application, it is prayed that the petitioner did not get justice, therefore, for transferring this case outside the district the petitioner is going to file application before the Rajasthan High Court. Therefore, time may be granted because at present vacation is going on.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not levelling any allegation of mala fide against the District & Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh but, for the reason that learned Sessions judge has taken upon himself to conduct the examination - in - chief of the witnesses instead of Public Prosecutor, therefore, once the presiding officer started asking questions of examination-in-chief, then, he literally acts as Public Prosecutor and, in such circumstances, it can easily be assumed that fair trial of the case is not possible in that Court at all. In support of his contention, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has invited my attention towards judgment reported in 1981 Cr. L.R. (SC) 246, Ram Chandra v. State of Haryana and submits that his application filed under Section 407, Cr.P.C. may be accepted and Sessions Case No. 49 of 2009, State v. Javed Khan & Another may be transferred to some other Court apart from the Court of Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, preferably to a Court outside Chittorgarh district.
(3.) I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner for transferring the case and perused the application Annex. - 1 and application Annex. - 3 which is said to be filed by the accused-petitioner before the Sessions Court.;