Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter XXXI: Transfer of Criminal Cases
Section 407: Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
If a fair and impartial trial cannot be had in a subordinate court, a question of law of unusual difficulty is likely, or it is expedient for justice or convenience, the High Court can order a case tried by another competent court, transfer cases or appeals between subordinate courts, commit a case to the Court of Session, or transfer it to itself.
- It can act on a lower court's report, a party's application, or its own motion, but a transfer within the same sessions division must first be sought from the Sessions Judge.
- Applications are by motion with affidavit. An accused applicant must give the Public Prosecutor written notice at least twenty-four hours before the hearing, and may be required to give a bond for compensation.
- The High Court can stay the lower court proceedings meanwhile, without affecting remand powers.
- A frivolous or vexatious applicant can be ordered to pay up to one thousand rupees compensation.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
(1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court—
(a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court subordinate thereto, or
(b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise, or
(c) that an order under this section is required by any provision of this Code, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice, it may order—
(i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified under sections 177 to 185 (both inclusive), but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offence;
(ii) that any particular case or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction;
(iii) that any particular case be committed for trial to a Court of Session; or
(iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself.
(2) The High Court may act either on the report of the lower Court, or on the application of a party interested, or on its own initiative:
Provided that no application shall lie to the High Court for transferring a case from one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in the same sessions division, unless an application for such transfer has been made to the Sessions Judge and rejected by him.
(3) Every application for an order under sub-section (1) shall be made by motion, which shall, except when the applicant is the Advocate-General of the State, be supported by affidavit or affirmation.
(4) When such application is made by an accused person, the High Court may direct him to execute a bond, with or without sureties, for the payment of any compensation which the High Court may award under sub-section (7).
(5) Every accused person making such application shall give to the Public Prosecutor notice in writing of the application, together with a copy of the grounds on which it is made; and no order shall be made on the merits of the applications unless at least twenty-four hours have elapsed between the giving of such notice and the hearing of the application.
(6) Where the application is for the transfer of a case or appeal from any Subordinate Court, the High Court may, if it is satisfied that it is necessary so to do in the interest of Justice, order that, pending the disposal of the application the proceedings in the Subordinate Court shall be stayed, on such terms as the High Court may think fit to impose:
Provided that such stay shall not affect the Subordinate Court‘s power of remand under section 309.
(7) Where an application for an order under sub-section (1) is dismissed, the High Court may, if it is of opinion that the application was frivolous or vexatious, order the applicant to pay by way of compensation to any person who has opposed the application such sum not exceeding one thousand rupees as it may consider proper in the circumstances of the case.
(8) When the High Court orders under sub-section (1) that a case be transferred from any Court for trial before itself, it shall observe in such trial the same procedure which that Court would have observed if the case had not been so transferred.
(9) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect any order of Government under section 197.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 407
- Aseem Khanna v. Akanksha Dua
- Arvind Kejriwal v. State & Anr
-
Vishnu Kumar Shukla & Anr. v. The State of Uttar
Whether the order passed by the High Court refusing to discharge the accused in a criminal case and quashi ng an FIR calls for interference.
- Naser Bin Abu Bakr Yafai v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu
- Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Classic Credit Ltd.
- Manmohan Attavar v. Neelam Manmohan Attavar
- State (Through) Central Bureau of Investigation v. Shri Kalyan Singh (Former Cm of Up) & Ors.
- K. Anbazhagan v. State of Karnatakaand Others
- Kamlesh Kumar and Ors. v. The State of Jharkhand and Ors.
- C. Muniappan & Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu
- Md. Shahabuddin v. State of Bihar & Ors.
- Satlsh Jaggi v. State of Chhattlshgarh and Ors.
- Lalu Prasad @ Lalu Prasad Yadav v. State Through C.B.I. (A.H.D.) Ranchi, Jharkhand
- Dhyan Investments and Trading Co. Ltd. v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.
- Nirmal Singh Etc v. State of Haryana
- Ranbir Yadav v. State of Bihar
- A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak & Anr.
- State of Karnataka v. Kuppuswamy Gownder
- State of Maharashtra v. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak & Anr.
- Akhilesh Prasad v. Union Territory of Mizoram