# Number of each type of witnesses already examined and to be examined

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 34/Admn
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1978-10-06
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 34/Admn
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/number-of-each-type-of-witnesses-already-examined-and-to-be-examined-163564
- **Pages:** 1

## Text

339
2.
Number of each type of witnesses already examined and to be examined.
3.
Time already spent and time to be taken.
4.
Suggestions of the District Judge for the disposal of the case.
C.L. No. C.V./8/78 dated 6th October, 1978
The Presiding Officers should avoid keeping part-heard criminal cases pending
unnecessarily on their files.
C.L. No. 34/Admn. (A) dated 26th March, 1980
The successor Sessions Judge may resume trial of part heard sessions cases
keeping in mind section 326 of Cr.P.C. (As Amended by Central Act No. 45 of 1978)
which permits the succeeding officer to resume trial from the stage left by his
predecessor. Since section 326 relates to procedural law, it can apply to the sessions
cases pending since before the commencement of the amended Act.
C.L. No. 76/IV-e/Admn. (A) dated 15th September, 1980
The above mentioned circular is modified to the extent that its provisions shall
not apply to sessions trial that were pending on April, 1, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) came
into force.
C.L. No. 71/53B/Admn. (A) dated 7th November, 1983
Whenever any Additional Sessions Judge (including Additional District and
Sessions Judge) is transferred from one court to another court in a local arrangement, he
shall submit a list, of all the part heard sessions trials in which recording of evidence has
commenced, to the Sessions Judge, who shall record an order for transferring such trials
to the file of the court to which the Additional Sessions Judge has been transferred.
C.L. No. 41/VIIb-116 dated 2nd June, 1984
The attention of all the District Judges and C.J.Ms is invited to the full Court
judgment delivered in the case of Radhey Shyam vs. State of U.P. reported in 1984 All.
L.J. 666 regarding power of Sessions Judges to transfer part heard case or appeal from
court of an additional Sessions Judge to another competent court within his sessions
division.
C.L. No. 54/VIIC-25 dated 31st August, 1984
It invites attention of all the Sessions Judges to sections 6, 7 and 8 of the U.P.
Dacoity Affected Areas Act, 1983, and says that the Sessions Judge is not competent to
entertain a transfer applications in respect of a case pending before the special court if
there is only one special court in the sessions division. The Sessions Judge can entertain
an application for transfer when there are two or more special courts in the sessions
division.
37.
EVIDENCE
G.L. No. 5 dated 7th March, 1952
Some Magistrates and Sessions Judges do not examine accused persons correctly.
This not unoften leads to a waste of the appellate court's time. Mistakes are also made by