The Delhi High Court has recently imposed a penalty of ₹25,000 on a litigant, Mohammad Ahmad, for attempting to transfer a case from the trial court to another jurisdiction on the grounds of perceived bias. The decision, handed down on August 10 by Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, was critical of Ahmad’s claims.
The petitioner sought to move a lawsuit away from the Karkardooma district court, alleging potential unfair treatment by the presiding judicial officer. This claim was based on oral remarks made during the proceedings, which Ahmad interpreted as bias. Furthermore, he accused the trial court judge of showing excessive leniency to the opposing party regarding a petition for his detention.
Justice Shankar emphasized that such accusations against a judicial officer should not be made casually or based on informal comments during hearings. The court underscored the gravity of these allegations, noting that they require substantial evidence and should not be made lightly. “The allegations made against the learned Trial Court are neither warranted nor conducive to the administration of justice,” stated the court.
The court further clarified that remarks made during hearings do not equate to decisions on the matter. The judge highlighted that the Civil Procedure Code’s provisions for case transfer do not support such claims of bias without concrete evidence. The court labeled the petition as an abuse of the judicial process.
In dismissing the plea, Justice Shankar remarked, “Such allegations ought not to be made in a routine manner or founded merely upon an interpretation placed by a litigant upon the oral exchanges taking place during the course of proceedings.”
More Read
The legal representatives for the petitioner were advocates Santosh and Noor-Ul-Islam, while the respondents were represented by advocates Sarojanand Jha, Rajreeta Ghosh, Rahul Kumar, and Muskan Saxena.
The court’s decision reflects a strong stance against frivolous legal motions that could undermine the integrity of judicial proceedings.
