Bombay High Court
A. RAJAK ABBAS SHAIKHversusSHABUDDIN MATIN SHAIKH AND ANR
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The proceedings are transferred to the Sessions Court having jurisdiction.
Summary
The appellant, A. Rajak Abbas Shaikh, was absent along with his counsel when the matter was called before the Kolhapur Circuit Bench of the Bombay High Court. The respondents, represented by counsel Onkar Bajaj and the State's APP N.B. Patil, relied on the Supreme Court decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320) to argue that the case should be heard by a Sessions Court having appropriate jurisdiction. The Court examined the jurisdictional issue and agreed that the proceedings were more suitably placed before the Sessions Court. Accordingly, the Court ordered the transfer of the case to the competent Sessions Court, directing the Registrar to effect the transfer and the Sessions Court to re‑register and expedite the matter. The appeal and any interim applications were subsequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the criminal proceedings pending before the High Court should be transferred to a Sessions Court having jurisdiction
Subjects
- jurisdiction
- transfer of criminal proceedings
- sessions court
- appellate jurisdiction
- procedural order
Judgment
6-APEAL-79-2011 (CR).docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. APPEAL NO. 79 OF 2011
A. Rajak Abbas Shaikh … Appellant
Versus
Shabuddin Matin Shaikh And Anr. … Respondents
——————
None for the Appellant.
Mr. Onkar Bajaj i/b Priyal Sarda, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1.
Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the Respondent – State.
——————
Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
Date : 17th September 2026.
PER COURT :
1. When this matter is called out, neither the Appellant nor the Advocate
for the Appellant are present physically or through V. C. mode. Mr. Onkar
Bajaj, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 1, is present.
2. Mr. Onkar Bajaj, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 and Mr. N.
B. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State, by referring to the decision
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Celestium Financial Vs. A.
Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320 , submit that these
proceedings would now lay before the Sessions Court having
Arjun 1
6-APEAL-79-2011 (CR).docx
jurisdiction. They therefore submits that these proceedings be transferred to
the Sessions Court having jurisdiction.
3. In view of the above, the following order is passed :-
(i) The present proceedings be transferred to the
Sessions Court, having jurisdiction;
(ii) The Registrar (Judicial) of this Court to take
appropriate steps for transferring these proceedings to the
Sessions Court, having jurisdiction;
(iii) The Sessions Court, to which these proceedings
would be transferred or assigned, after re-registration of the
same, shall issue notice to the parties to the said
proceedings and thereafter proceed with the matter on its
own merits and in accordance with law.
(iv) Considering the proceedings which are now being
transferred have been pending for some time, the Sessions
Court to which these proceedings would be assigned is
requested to make an endeavour to expedite the
proceedings. Parties shall cooperate in the early disposal of
the proceedings.
4. Criminal Appeal No. 79 of 2011 is disposed of.
5. Interim Application, if any, is also disposed of.
[ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]
Digitally
signed by
ARJUN
ARJUN KRISHNA Arjun 2
KRISHNA RODGE
RODGE Date:
2026.09.21
10:38:02
+0530
Checking your session…