Twitter
Advertisement

Supreme Court rules against court-transfer tactics

An order of transfer is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because an interested party has expressed some apprehension about proper conduct of the trial.

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

To prevent the court-hunting tactics being adopted by the accused in serious crimes, the Supreme Court has said trial courts should not allow the accused persons to hunt for the court of their choice.

"An order of transfer is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because an interested party has expressed some apprehension about proper conduct of the trial. The power has to be exercised cautiously and in exceptional situations, where it becomes necessary to do so, to provide credibility to the trial. There has to be a real apprehension that there would be miscarriage of justice," a bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra said.

Coming down heavily on a trial court for transferring the trial of a kidnapping and rioting case to another court after coming under pressure from the accused, the apex court bench headed by Justice Misra said "If this can be the foundation to transfer a case, it will bring anarchy in the adjudicatory process."

"If they are allowed such room, they do not have to face the trial before a court in which they do not feel comfortable..," the bench said while reversing the order passed by Gujarat High Court directing the Principal Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad, to transfer a 12-year-old kidnapping, rioting and criminal trespass case against one Natubhai Maganbhai Edanwala to another sessions court.

Apprehending conviction from the trial judge, the accused had moved an application before the Principal Sessions Judge to shift his case to another trial court but his plea was rejected. Being the aggrieved of the order, Edanwala had approached the High Court, which had allowed his plea and directed the principal sessions judge to transfer the trial.

The bench said "On a careful scrutiny of the order passed by the High Court, it is not clear whether the High Court has been convinced that the accused has any real apprehension or bias against the trial judge…."

Further the bench said it was also required on the part of the court to see whether the apprehension alleged was reasonable or not. "The apprehension must appear to the court to be a reasonable apprehension," it said.

Observing that in the instant case, the apprehension is "absolutely mercurial and cannot remotely be stated to be reasonable," the courted cited the previous rulings of the apex court saying seeking transfer by the accused was " inconceivable."

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement