Court dismisses transfer plea in matrimonial dispute, says adverse orders cannot justify allegations against a judge
The Delhi High Court has held that an unfavourable order alone cannot be a ground to allege bias against a judge or seek transfer of a case.
The Court made the observation while hearing a transfer petition filed by a woman. She wanted a criminal matrimonial case moved from a Mahila Court to another court. She alleged bias and prejudice on the part of the presiding judge.
According to the petitioner, certain orders passed during the proceedings showed unfairness. She said those orders justified transfer of the matter.
The key issue before the Court was clear. Could adverse judicial orders alone justify an inference of bias and support a transfer plea?
Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that dissatisfaction with judicial orders cannot be treated as proof of bias or prejudice by a judge.
The Court also observed that accepting such pleas would open the floodgates. Litigants could then seek transfer of cases simply because they received adverse orders.
It further reiterated that allegations of bias must rest on substantive material. They cannot be based on conjecture, suspicion, or displeasure with judicial outcomes.
Finding no merit in the allegations, the Delhi High Court dismissed the transfer petition. It also declined to interfere with the proceedings before the trial court.
The ruling underlines an important point. Judicial independence cannot be weakened by routine bias allegations based only on unfavourable orders.
