The importance of litigants having faith and confidence in the impartiality of the courts, and the duty of the accused to cooperate for a speedy trial.

1. Mr. Chinnasamy, accused in Spl.C.C 2 of 15 on the file of Special Judge for the trial of cases under Prevention of Corruption Act at Salem, seeks transfer of the case to some other court on the ground that the presiding officer has prejudged the case.

2. To substantiate this plea he has alleged that, On 16.02.2017 when his discharge petition was taken up for hearing the judge observed that he is competent to sentence him for 7 years imprisonment and to his mind he is already guilty of the crime. On 15.09.2017 he observed that, the petitioner in his arogancy of power had imposed penalty of Rs 2.5 crores on Karnan and Rs 2.25 crores on Vellaiyan besides sent report to the Government against the staff of judiciary to take action, so he will not leave him without convicting him for 7 years. On 20.10.2017 he observed, that the person against whom the petitioner recommended for Rs.2.25 crores penalty have foisted case against him. Because he has antagonised them he is standing before the court as accused. Surely, the petitioner will be imprisoned for 7 years.

3. The petitioner contents that by the above utterance, the Presiding Officer has entered the arena of controversy in which he has arrayed himself as party against him. The words used by a Judicial officer, though susceptible of explanation and traceable to a strong sense of duty, may at time be calculated to create in his mind an apprehension that he may not have an impartial trial. Hence the case has to be transferred to some other competent court.

4. In support of this petition, the learned counsel relied the judgment of the Karnataka High Court, reported in 1975 Crl.L.J 744, in the case of Adam Basha vs. State of Karnataka, wherein the observations made by the Presiding Officer tend to create an apprehension in the mind of the accused person that he may not have a fair decision at the hands of the Presiding Officer, it would be expedient in the interest of justice to order transfer. It is utmost importance that litigants should have faith and confidence in the impartiality of the courts.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that, the present petition casting aspersion on the Presiding Officer is filed with ulterior motive to protract the proceedings. The averments found in the petition are false and frivolous. The petitioner is facing trial for the alleged offence under section 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption act for demanding bribe of Rs 10,000/- from each brick klin owners of Vazhappdi Taluk at Salem District to mine red sand from patta land and on 30.10.2010, as advance received Rs.10,000/- (twenty numbers of each five hundred rupees notes) smeared with phenolphathalaien through his driver Dharmaraja from Vellaiyan, the defacto complainant. As per the direction of the petitioner, Dharmaraja went to the AXIS bank and exchanged the 20 five hundred rupees into 10 thousand rupees notes. The hand fingers of Dharmaraja was washed in sodium carbonate solution, which on dipping turned pink indicating presence of phenolphalien. Later on confession of Dharmaraja, the tainted money was recovered from the AXIS bank cash counter. Both the petitioner and his driver Dharmaraja were arrested on the same day. Though the case is of the year 2010, the petitioner did not allow the investigation to proceed.

6. Immediately after caught in the trap proceedings, he filed petition Crl.O.P. No. 22428/2011 to quash the proceedings alleging that he took charge as Thasildar, Vazhapadi on 07.06.2010 and thereafter started taking stringent action against persons who are indulging in illegal quarry of sand and imposed fine on the offenders. Persons who were affected by his action had conspired and arranged for trap as if he demanded bribe and received it through his driver Dharmaraja. On 19.03.2015 this petition was dismissed. Immediately, he filed another petition Crl.O.P No. 7155/2015 before this court seeking transfer of investigation from DV & AC t