Bombay HC: The Assistant Sessions Judge, the Additional Sessions Judge, and the Sessions Judge exercise co-ordinate or equal jurisdiction of a Sessions Court within the limits of the authority conferred on them by the Code

Under Section 17, Sub-section (3), all Assistant Judges are subordinate to the Sessions Judge in whose Court they exercise jurisdiction. An Additional Sessions Judge exercises jurisdiction of a Sessions Court when empowered under Section 193(2) and Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Assistant Sessions Judge, the Additional Sessions Judge, and the Sessions Judge exercise co-ordinate or equal jurisdiction of a Sessions Court within the limits of the authority conferred on them by the Code, and are nevertheless different Courts each subordinate to the High Court. {Para 34}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Criminal Revision No. 48 of 1931

Decided On: 03.03.1931

Emperor Vs. Lakshman Chavji Narangikar

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Govind D. Madgavkar, S.S. Patkar and S.J. Murphy, JJ.

Authored By : Govind D. Madgavkar, S.S. Patkar, S.J. Murphy

Govind D. Madgavkar, J.

Equivalent Citation: AIR1931Bom313, 1931(33)BOMLR675, ILR1931 55 Bom 576, 134Ind. Cas.347,MANU/MH/0010/1931.

Print Page

Whether Assistant session judge can decide revision alongwith delay condonation application?

The expression "in respect of" is of, wider connotation than the word "in". Section 400, therefore, includes within its scope not only references and revisions (covered by Chap. XXX), but all other incidental and ancillary matter also. The application Under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act filed along with the revision in question was undoubtedly an ancillary matter and it was, therefore, open to the Sessions Judge to transfer that application and the defective revision to the Court of Sri K. P. Asthana for disposal. If, therefore, Sri K. P. Asthana decided that application and admitted the revision, he cannot be said to have done anything wrong. He had full jurisdiction to, pass the order which he passed. This revision is misconceived and must, therefore fail. Accordingly I reject it.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Decided On: 01.03.1978

Ram Newaz and Ors. Vs. Chabi Nandan Pandey and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V.N. Varma, J.

Citation: 1978 Cri. L. J. 632(All), MANU/UP/0392/1978.

Print Page

Whether appeal from conviction given by assistant session Judge lie to session court?

On perusal of the impugned judgment and order it reveals that the aforesaid order was passed by learned Assistant Sessions Judge and the Section 374(3)(a) of the Code provides that the appeal from convictions given by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge will lie to the Court of Sessions. Although, the present appeal is not intended against the order of conviction but the same provision have to follow as regards the forum to whom the appeal lies. Obviously, against the order of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge appeal will not lie to the High Court by skipping the forum.

In the High Court of Gauhati

(Before Rumi Kumari Phukan, J.)

Akhtar Mirza v. State of Assam

Crl.L.P 136/2018

Decided on May 14, 2019

Citation: 2019 SCC OnLine Gau 2295 : (2019) 6 Gau LR 386

Print Page

Whether session Judge can assign cases to assistant session Judge in which sentence to be awarded is more than ten years?

We are, therefore, of the view that in cases where the
sentence which has to be awarded is more than 10 years, the
Sessions  Judge  is  not authorized  to  assign  such  cases to
Assistant Sessions Judge in view of section 28 of the Criminal
Procedure  Code  which  is  a  substantive  provision  in  the

Criminal Procedure Code and, therefore, section 28 will have
to be construed as a provision which imposes a bar on the
Sessions Judge in assigning cases to the Assistant Sessions
Judge where the sentence above 10 years can be awarded.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.428 OF 2012

Prabhakar @ Babu Laxman Pawar  v state of maharashtra 

     Judgment  pronounced on 02/07/2012

JUDGMENT: (Per V.M. Kanade, J.)

Print Page