Jurisdictional defect in criminal trial invalidates convictions where transfer after commencement of trial was unlawful and uncured by section 465.

A criminal trial conducted by a judge who lacked lawful authority was held invalid because the case had been made over and then altered after the trial had commenced in breach of section 409(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and no valid transfer order under section 407 was shown. The court treated the proceedings as not a trial in the eye of law, so section 465 could not cure the jurisdictional defect. The convictions and sentences were therefore liable to be set aside, and a fresh trial before the competent Sessions Judge was directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the trial conducted by the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge was without jurisdiction because the case had been made over and then altered after commencement of trial, and whether the convictions and sentences could therefore be sustained.

Analysis: The case had been made over under the Criminal Procedure Code, but once trial had commenced the case could not be withdrawn in a manner contrary to section 409(2). The record showed that the matter moved between different judges without a valid transfer order under section 407. As the judge who proceeded with the trial lacked lawful authority to conduct it, the proceedings were not a trial in the eye of law. In such a situation, section 465 could not be invoked to cure the defect.

Conclusion: The trial was invalid and the convictions and sentences were liable to be set aside. A fresh trial before the competent Sessions Judge was directed.

---