Kerala High Court
Bar Association, Kasaragod vs State Of Kerala on 9 September, 2025
Author: N. Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2025:KER:66336
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 18TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 22081 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
BAR ASSOCIATION, KASARAGOD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
PRADEEP RAO, S/O KRISHNA RAO,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
KASARAGOD, PIN - 671121
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.ANAS MUHAMMED SHAMNAD
SRI.T.U.SUJITH KUMAR
SHRI.THAREEK T.S.
SHRI.HAMDAN MANSOOR K.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI, PIN - 682031
3 THE SHERISTIDAR
KASARAGOD DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT,
KASARAGOD, PIN - 671121
2025:KER:66336
W.P.(C) No.22081/2025
:2:
* ADDL.4 THE HON'BLE SESSIONS JUDGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT,
KASARAGOD - 671121
(ADDITIONAL 4TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 09.09.2025 IN IA.NO.1/2025)
BY ADV
SMT.SHIBI.K.P.
SMT. ANIMA M., GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD 12.08.2025, THE COURT ON 09.09.2025 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:66336
W.P.(C) No.22081/2025
:3:
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No.22081 of 2025
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 9th day of September, 2025
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
Bar Association, Kasaragod is the petitioner.
The petitioner seeks to quash the official memorandum dated
10.06.2025 issued by the District and Sessions Court,
Kasaragod transferring Sessions Cases instituted prior to
01.07.20204 from the Assistant Sessions Court, Kasaragod to
the Assistant Sessions Court, Hosdurg.
2. The petitioner states that by Ext.P1 OM
dated 30.05.2025 it was directed that Sessions Cases
pending before the Assistant Sessions Court, Kasaragod
shall stand transferred to the Assistant Sessions Court,
2025:KER:66336
Hosdurg for trial and disposal. The petitioner filed Ext.P2
representation pointing out serious practical concerns. The
OM dated 30.05.2025 was thereupon cancelled as per Ext.P3
OM dated 10.06.2025.
3. On the same day, Ext.P4 OM dated
10.06.2025 was issued transferring Sessions Cases instituted
prior to 01.07.2024 to Assistant Sessions Court, Hosdurg.
Thereupon, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 representation
dated 13.06.2025. Ext.P4 OM is manifestly arbitrary and
unresonable, contends the petitioner. It has been issued
without assigning any valid reason or objective criteria for the
transfer of such a large number of cases. The transfer is not
supported by any data.
4. The petitioner submitted that a Sessions
Judge has no jurisdiction to transfer Sessions Cases wherein
charge was already framed and trial has already commenced.
The order suffers from non-disclosure of material reasons.
The decision to transfer cases without consulting the
2025:KER:66336
stakeholders violates the principles of encomium practised
over centuries, contends the petitioner.
5. The 2nd respondent-Registrar General filed a
counter affidavit. The 2nd respondent stated that the
allegations of the petitioner that the transfer of the cases will
put the litigants and the lawyers to inconvenience is totally
baseless. The objective of the transfer is to expedite the
disposal of cases. The delay that may be caused in the
disposal, when 487 sessions cases are before the court can
very well be imagined. If 89 of those cases are transferred to
another court that has a pendency of only 17 sessions cases,
it will only help in the speedy disposal of those cases.
6. All the arguments of the petitioner to the
contrary are devoid of merits or reason and will only help to
prolong the cases. Speedy trial is the fundamental right of
both the victim and the accused and the courts are duty
bound to dispose of all the cases at the earliest. The interests
of the Bar cannot stand in the way of speedy justice to the
2025:KER:66336
parties.
7. The 2nd respondent further submitted that
the cases were transferred from one court to another within
the same Sessions division. Hence, no jurisdictional aspects
are involved in the transfer. The order to transfer records
within three days was made only to expedite the cases.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned Government Pleader representing the 1st
respondent and the learned counsel appearing for
respondents 2 and 3.
9. The grievance of the petitioner-Association
is regarding Ext.P4 OM issued by the Assistant Sessions
Court directing transfer of Sessions Cases instituted prior to
01.07.2024 from the Assistant Sessions Court, Kasaragod to
the Assistant Sessions Court, Hosdurg.
10. The respondents would submit that while
examining the pendency of cases in different courts of the
Districts, the District and Sessions Judge, Kasaragod found
2025:KER:66336
that only 17 Sessions Cases are pending before the
Assistant Sessions Court, Hosdurg. At the same time, there
are 487 Sessions Cases and large number of civil cases
pending in the Assistant Sessions Court, Kasaragod.
11. After the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita came into force, only Sessions Cases instituted prior
to 01.07.2024 can be made over to another Assistant
Sessions Court. Therefore, the District and Sessions Judge,
Kasaragod transferred 89 cases instituted before 01.07.2024
to the Assistant Sessions Court, Hosdurg.
12. It is evident that the transfer of cases was
intended to achieve the prime aim of speedy disposal of
criminal cases. The transfer is intended to ensure timely
justice to the litigants and to reduce pendency of cases. The
members of the Bar Association can attend the transferred
cases online. Witnesses also can be examined online.
Therefore, the Bar Association cannot project any legitimate
grievance.
2025:KER:66336
13. The 2nd respondent-Registrar would state
that no cases where the court has framed charges have been
transferred. Only those cases which were instituted prior to
01.07.2024 were transferred.
In the afore circumstances, I do not find any
merit in the writ petition. The writ petition is hence dismissed.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/01.09.2025
2025:KER:66336
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22081/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT & SESSIONS
COURT, KASARAGOD DATED 30.05.2025
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY
THE PETITIONER ASSOCIATION DATED
30.05.2025
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
CANCELLING THE TRANSFER ISSUED BY THE
DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, KASARAGOD
DATED 10.06.2025
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT & SESSIONS
COURT, KASARAGOD DATED 10.06.2025
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY
THE PETITIONER ASSOCIATION DATED
13.06.2025
