MLA FROM MAU DISTRICT, UP versus JAIL SUPERINTENDENT (ROPAR) & ORS.

MLA FROM MAU DISTRICT, UP versus JAIL SUPERINTENDENT (ROPAR) & ORS.

The petition under Section 406 Cr.P.C. is maintainable at the instance of the State (State is a 'party interested'), but Section 406 cannot be used to transfer the Punjab case because it is at the investigation stage without filing of final report; however, exercising powers under Article 142 the Supreme Court directed Respondents (Jail Superintendent, Roopnagar and State of Punjab) to hand over custody of the accused Mukhtar Ansari to the State of Uttar Pradesh within two weeks to be lodged in District Jail, Banda (with directions for medical care), and dismissed the related transfer petitions.

Parties
Petitioner: State of Uttar Pradesh; Respondent: Jail Superintendent, Roopnagar (Ropar); Respondent: State of Punjab; Respondent: Mohd. Mukhtar Ansari
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (criminal) / Judgment
Outcome
Writ petition partly allowed; transfer petitions dismissed
Legal Topics
Article 32, Section 406 Cr.p.c., Article 142, Transfer of Prisoners, Maintainability, Production Warrants, Medical Grounds for Non Production
Constitutional Law Criminal Procedure Prison Law Article 32 Section 406 Cr.p.c. Article 142 Transfer of Prisoners Maintainability +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Uttar Pradesh

Petitioner

Jail Superintendent, Roopnagar (Ropar)

Respondent

State of Punjab

Respondent

Mohd. Mukhtar Ansari

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (criminal) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a State is a 'party interested' under Section 406 Cr.P.C. and hence can file for transfer under that provision
  2. 2 Whether Section 406 Cr.P.C. permits transfer where the matter is at investigation stage
  3. 3 Whether Supreme Court can, in exercise of Article 142, order transfer of custody of a prisoner between States despite the Transfer of Prisoners Act, 1950

Ratio Decidendi

The petition under Section 406 Cr.P.C. is maintainable at the instance of the State (State is a 'party interested'), but Section 406 cannot be used to transfer the Punjab case because it is at the investigation stage without filing of final report; however, exercising powers under Article 142 the Supreme Court directed Respondents (Jail Superintendent, Roopnagar and State of Punjab) to hand over custody of the accused Mukhtar Ansari to the State of Uttar Pradesh within two weeks to be lodged in District Jail, Banda (with directions for medical care), and dismissed the related transfer petitions.

Court Disposition

Writ petition partly allowed; transfer petitions dismissed

Orders

  • Petition held maintainable under Section 406 Cr.P.C.
  • Relief seeking transfer of the Punjab case to the Special Court (Para-26(A)) declined because the Punjab case (Crime No.05 of 2019) is at investigation stage and no final report has been filed