Held, Section 407 of the Code deals with the power of the High Court to "transfer" cases and appeals. Transfer includes removing a case or class of cases from the jurisdiction of the Court where it/they is/are pending trial, and to put it/them under the jurisdiction of another Court for adjudication. Impugned notification simply notified the premises of District Jail, to be the place of sitting for holding the trial of cases pending against the Appellant and it doesn't affect or abridge the jurisdiction of the Court of Sessions to try those cases. There was just a shift simpliciter in the venue of the trial. Thus, the High Court cannot be said to have transferred the cases pending against the Appellant. Hence, the present case not a case of "transfer" to which the provisions of Section 407 are attracted. Appeal dismissed.
Whether a trial conducted inside the jail premises violative of Section 327 of Cr.P.C. as well as Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Held, a classification may be reasonable only if a single individual treated as a class by himself. Special circumstances or reasons applicable to him alone not applicable to others. Trial inside a jail does not stand vitiated solely because it is conducted inside the jail premises. Valid reasons which necessitated the shifting of the venue of the trial of cases pending against the Appellant. No special procedure prescribed and the cases to be conducted and disposed of in accordance with procedures as prescribed under the Cr.P.C. In the present case,no prejudice caused to the Appellant while shifting the cases to the Special Courts situated inside the premises of District Jail. No violation either of Section 327 Cr.P.C. or of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Appeal dismissed.
