The State Government appoints the Sessions Judge since it 'establishes' the court.

The State Government only creates/establishes the Court of Session as an institution; the actual judges (Sessions Judge and Additional Sessions Judges) are appointed by the High Court, keeping the judiciary independent from the executive.

A Sessions Court can shift its hearing location whenever it wants for convenience.

It can only sit elsewhere within the division if both the prosecution and the accused consent, and the court finds it genuinely more convenient — it's not a unilateral decision.

If the Sessions Judge's post is vacant, no urgent legal matters can be handled until a new judge is appointed.

The law specifically allows an Additional Sessions Judge, or in their absence the Chief Judicial Magistrate, to handle urgent applications during such vacancies, ensuring no complete standstill.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Section 8

Court of Session

(1) The State Government shall establish a Court of Session for every sessions division.§

(2) Every Court of Session shall be presided over by a Judge, to be appointed by the High Court.§

(3) The High Court may also appoint Additional Sessions Judges to exercise jurisdiction in a Court of Session.§

(4) The Sessions Judge of one sessions division may be appointed by the High Court to be also an Additional Sessions Judge of another division, and in such case, he may sit for the disposal of cases at such place or places in the other division as the High Court may direct.§

(5) Where the office of the Sessions Judge is vacant, the High Court may make arrangements for the disposal of any urgent application which is, or may be, made or pending before such Court of Session by an Additional Sessions Judge or if there be no Additional Sessions Judge, by a Chief Judicial Magistrate, in the sessions division; and every such Judge or Magistrate shall have jurisdiction to deal with any such application.§

(6) The Court of Session shall ordinarily hold its sitting at such place or places as the High Court may, by notification, specify; but, if, in any particular case, the Court of Session is of opinion that it will tend to the general convenience of the parties and witnesses to hold its sittings at any other place in the sessions division, it may, with the consent of the prosecution and the accused, sit at that place for the disposal of the case or the examination of any witness or witnesses therein.§

(7) The Sessions Judge may, from time to time, make orders consistent with this Sanhita, as to the distribution of business among such Additional Sessions Judges.§

(8) The Sessions Judge may also make provision for the disposal of any urgent application, in the event of his absence or inability to act, by an Additional Sessions Judge or if there be no Additional Sessions Judge, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, and such Judge or Magistrate shall be deemed to have jurisdiction to deal with any such application.§

Explanation.—For the purposes of this Sanhita, “appointment” does not include the first appointment, posting or promotion of a person by the Government to any Service, or post in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State, where under any law, such appointment, posting or promotion is required to be made by the Government.§

Why this exists

The Sessions Court is the main trial court for serious criminal cases (like those carrying long sentences or the death penalty) at the district level. This provision continues a structure inherited from the old Code of Criminal Procedure, ensuring every region has a functioning Sessions Court, a clear appointment process controlled by the High Court (to preserve judicial independence from the executive), and practical backup arrangements so justice doesn't stall due to staff shortages, vacancies, or a judge's temporary absence.

How courts read it

Courts have historically read the equivalent CrPC provision (Section 9) as ensuring continuity of judicial functioning — for instance, upholding that an Additional Sessions Judge or Chief Judicial Magistrate handling urgent matters during a vacancy has full and valid jurisdiction, not just a stopgap role open to later challenge. The requirement of consent from both parties before shifting the sitting location (sub-section 6) has been read strictly to protect fairness and the accused's right to a fair, undisrupted trial.

Common misconceptions

Myth: The State Government appoints the Sessions Judge since it 'establishes' the court.
Fact: The State Government only creates/establishes the Court of Session as an institution; the actual judges (Sessions Judge and Additional Sessions Judges) are appointed by the High Court, keeping the judiciary independent from the executive.
Myth: A Sessions Court can shift its hearing location whenever it wants for convenience.
Fact: It can only sit elsewhere within the division if both the prosecution and the accused consent, and the court finds it genuinely more convenient — it's not a unilateral decision.
Myth: If the Sessions Judge's post is vacant, no urgent legal matters can be handled until a new judge is appointed.
Fact: The law specifically allows an Additional Sessions Judge, or in their absence the Chief Judicial Magistrate, to handle urgent applications during such vacancies, ensuring no complete standstill.