“‘CMM has only Administrative Powers’: Delhi High Court Holds Transfer of Cases Between Magistrates Under BNSS ‘Cannot Be Done on Judicial Grounds Without Sessions Court Approval’”
Sanchayita Lahkar
The Delhi High Court, Single Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma, delivered a judgment on March 17, 2025, regarding the powers of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) to transfer cases under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The court stated that the CMM does not have the authority to transfer cases between magistrates on judicial grounds but can only do so for administrative reasons. The case involved a transfer order issued by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), which was challenged by the petitioner.
The petitioner, Sudesh Chhikara, filed a petition challenging an order dated June 7, 2024, passed by the ACMM, West Delhi, in Case M-17/2024. The ACMM's order transferred a complaint case bearing CC No. 6895/2019 from the court of MM-07, West, Tis Hazari Court, to MM-02 (Mahila Court), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. This transfer was requested by the second respondent, Baljeet Singh, the petitioner's father-in-law. The petitioner and respondent were involved in multiple litigations concerning matrimonial disputes between the petitioner and the son of the second respondent.
The petitioner contended that under Section 410 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) and its corresponding section in BNSS, 2023, the CMM lacks the authority to transfer cases between Metropolitan Magistrates (MMs). It was argued that Section 19(3) of CrPC only permits the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to allocate and distribute cases administratively and does not empower the CMM to transfer cases on judicial grounds. Additionally, the petitioner raised concerns that the ACMM had not issued prior notice before ordering the transfer.
The key legal issue before the court was whether the CMM or ACMM had the authority to transfer cases between MMs on judicial grounds upon an application being moved.
The court examined the relevant provisions of CrPC and BNSS, 2023, particularly Sections 406, 407, and 408 of CrPC and their equivalents in BNSS, which confer transfer powers explicitly upon the Supreme Court, High Court, and Sessions Judge. The court cited previous judgements from the High Courts of Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat to reinforce that the power of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 410 of CrPC is limited to administrative withdrawal and reassignment of cases and does not extend to judicial transfers.
The court stated: “Since the legislature in its own wisdom has conferred the power of transfer only to Supreme Court, High Courts and the Sessions Court, it cannot be given by way of inference to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate.”
Additionally, the court examined the legislative intent behind BNSS, 2023, and observed that Section 10(2) of BNSS, 2023, allows the High Court to specify the powers of an Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. However, in the absence of any such directive from the High Court, the ACMM does not have independent judicial authority to transfer cases.
Further, the court examined precedents from various High Courts on the limitations of judicial officers at the magistrate level in transferring cases. It referred to the case of A.K. Singh, Special Railway Magistrate, Jabalpur v. Virendra Kumar Jain (2001) and Chandrakantbhai Bhaichandbhai Sharma v. State of Gujarat (2015), where the courts stated that the Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot transfer cases upon a party’s application, as the transfer powers rest solely with the Sessions Judge, High Court, or Supreme Court.
The court also noted procedural irregularities in the ACMM’s transfer order. It stated that “the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate did not even consider it necessary to issue notice before passing the impugned order.” This omission, according to the court, violated principles of natural justice and procedural fairness.
The court issued the following directives:
- “Under Section 410 CrPC and Section 450 BNSS, the power conferred upon the Chief Judicial Magistrate is only administrative in nature. The Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot ‘transfer’ a case from one Court to another upon an application being moved or suo moto.”
- “The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot exercise the administrative power of transfer of a case from one Court to another within its jurisdiction unless an order is passed by the High Court under Section 10(2) BNSS, 2023.”
- “The Respondent No.2 shall be at liberty to move a proper application before the Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge under Section 448 BNSS, 2023, for transfer of the case from one Court to another. The Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge may exercise jurisdiction without being influenced by the order of this Court in accordance with law.”
The court directed the Registrar General to circulate the judgment among judicial officers for reference and compliance.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioner: Mr. Jaipal Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Hemant Mehla, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State; Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, Amicus Curiae, along with Mr. Ujwal Ghai, Mr. Pulkit Jolly, and Ms. Tamanna Agarwal, Advocates; Mr. Baljit Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.2
Case Title: Sudesh Chhikara v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Neutral Citation: 2025: DHC:1693
Case Number: CRL.M.C. 6572/2024
Bench: Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma
[Read/Download order]
