Different times and places mean criminal cases do not arise from the same transaction.

On 27 December 2020, the applicant alleged that Hero Mahendra Nag @ Rupendra Nag and four others entered and ransacked his house/shop and abused him.

FIR No. 11/2021 was registered against them under Sections 294, 506, 427 and 147 IPC, and the resulting Criminal Case No. 1133/2021 was pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jagdalpur.

Subsequently, Hero Mahendra Nag lodged a cross-FIR against the applicant arising from the same date but alleging a different incident at a different time and place.

FIR No. 63/2021 was registered under Sections 294 and 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(d) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; the charge-sheet was filed before the Special Judge, Jagdalpur, where Special Case No. 20/2021 was pending against the applicant.

The applicant sought transfer of Criminal Case No. 1133/2021 to the Special Court so that both matters could be heard together.

The Special Judge rejected the application on 24 June 2022, leading to the present revision under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC.

Whether Criminal Case No. 1133/2021 and Special Case No. 20/2021 were counter-cases arising out of the same incident or transaction so as to warrant their being heard together by the Special Court.

Whether the Special Judge’s order dated 24 June 2022 rejecting the transfer application was legally unsustainable and liable to be set aside in revision under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC.

The Court exercised revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which permits examination of the correctness, legality and propriety of a subordinate court’s order.

The Court applied the principle that criminal cases may appropriately be treated as counter-cases and heard together where they arise from the same incident or transaction; however, the mere fact that the cases relate to the same date or general dispute is insufficient where the alleged occurrences differ materially in time and place.

The Court did not rely on any expressly cited judicial precedent.

The FIRs arose against the background of a dispute concerning the construction of a house by Hero Mahendra Nag on government land, and both incidents were alleged to have occurred on 27 December 2020.

However, examination of the FIRs showed that the alleged occurrences took place at different locations and at different times, with a two-hour difference between them.

On that basis, the Court held that Criminal Case No. 1133/2021 could not be characterised as the counter-case to Special Case No. 20/2021, nor could the two offences be said to have been committed in the course of the same transaction.

Consequently, there was no legal basis for interfering with the Special Judge’s refusal to transfer the case.

The Court upheld the order dated 24 June 2022 refusing to transfer Criminal Case No. 1133/2021 to the Special Court, holding that the two matters were not counter-cases arising from the same transaction.

The interim stay granted on 28 July 2022 was recalled.