Transfer of trials between Special Courts under PMLA and BNSS upheld, allowing consolidation before a single judge.

High Court held that Section 44(1)(c) of the PML Act is an enabling provision permitting the authority who filed the PMLA complaint to seek committal of scheduled-offence proceedings to the PMLA-designated Special Court; that does not exclude other aggrieved persons from invoking transfer jurisdiction under BNSS. The court recognised that joint trial of scheduled offences and PMLA offences is generally impossible, but where both courts are notified Special Courts under analogous statutes, a petitioner may seek transfer directly to the High Court under BNSS Section 447 to consolidate trials before a single judge. Result: transfer petition allowed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an accused can invoke Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to seek transfer of a case from one Special Court to another Special Court where a related PML Act complaint is pending, notwithstanding Section 44(1)(c) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act; (ii) Whether the proviso to Section 447 (requiring prior application to the Sessions Judge for transfer within the same sessions division) bars direct recourse to the High Court for transfer between Special Courts constituted by statute.

Issue (i): Whether an accused can invoke Section 447 BNSS to seek transfer of a scheduled-offence case to a Special Court where a related PML Act complaint is pending despite Section 44(1)(c) PML Act.

Analysis: Section 44(1)(c) PML Act enables the authority empowered to file a complaint under the PML Act to apply for committal of a scheduled-offence case to the Special Court which has taken cognizance of the PML Act complaint; the provision is enabling and contemplates committal on application by the authorised authority. Section 65 PML Act preserves applicability of Cr.P.C. and related transfer provisions insofar as they are not inconsistent with PML Act. Section 447 BNSS vests the High Court with power to transfer cases in the interest of justice. Where both origin and destination courts are Special Courts notified under the relevant special statutes, the right of other aggrieved persons to seek transfer under Section 447 BNSS is not ousted by Section 44(1)(c) PML Act.

Conclusion: The accused may invoke Section 447 BNSS to seek transfer of the scheduled-offence case to the Special Court where the PML Act complaint is pending; Section 44(1)(c) does not preclude such an application by the accused.

Issue (ii): Whether the proviso to Section 447 BNSS (requiring prior application to the Sessions Judge for transfers within the same sessions division) prevents direct approach to the High Court for transfer between Special Courts created by statute.

Analysis: The proviso mirrors the Cr.P.C. provision requiring prior application to the Sessions Judge for intra-division transfers. Special Courts under the PML Act and the Prevention of Corruption Act are statutory creations with appointments and jurisdiction determined by their respective statutes. Transfers between Special Courts created by special statutes are not properly governed by the Sessions Judge administrative mechanism contemplated by the proviso; accordingly, a party may directly approach the High Court under Section 447 BNSS for transfer between such Special Courts.

Conclusion: The proviso to Section 447 BNSS does not bar direct recourse to the High Court for transfer of a case from one statutorily constituted Special Court to another Special Court; prior application to the Sessions Judge is not required in that context.

Final Conclusion: The High Court is empowered to order transfer of the scheduled-offence case from Special CBI Court-I, Ernakulam to Special CBI Court-II, Ernakulam in the interest of justice so that related matters pending before a statutorily constituted Special Court may be dealt with by the same Judge.

Ratio Decidendi: Where both origin and destination courts are Special Courts constituted by statute, an accused may invoke the High Court's transfer jurisdiction under Section 447 BNSS and need not first apply to the Sessions Judge; Section 44(1)(c) PML Act, being enabling for the authorised authority to seek committal, does not oust the right of an accused to seek transfer in the interest of justice.

---