IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUMEET GOEL, J.
Dinesh Chand Bansal - Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and another - Respondent
CRM-M-72601-2025
Decided On : 30-01-2026
JUDGMENT :
SUMEET GOEL, J.
1. The petition in hand has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 528 read with Section 447 of BNSS, 2023 laying challenge to the order dated 08.08.2025 (hereinafter referred to as impugned order) vide which an application preferred by the petitioner (herein) under Section 448 of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 408 of Cr.P.C.), (hereinafter referred to as application in question) for transfer of his case from the Court of current learned Presiding Judicial Officer, has been dismissed.
2. The relevant factual backdrop of the lis in hand is adumbrated thus:
(i) A criminal complaint under Section 500 IPC was filed by respondent No.2 (herein) before Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula, Haryana. The essence of the complaint, as set out in the petition, is that the complainant (respondent No.2 herein) is a well-known and respected businessman in the pharmaceutical and healthcare sector and has also served as District Governor of Rotary International, District 3080 for the year 2017–18. The complainant was unanimously nominated for the post of District Governor for the year 2017–18 and was duly appointed by Rotary International after the nomination process was found to be valid. It has been alleged that the accused (petitioner herein), who was a rival candidate, & was dissatisfied with his defeat, started initiating repeated objections, complaints and litigation to challenge the selection of the complainant. Despite multiple reviews by the Rotary International, the accused (petitioner herein) continued filing civil suits and appeals before the Courts. It has been further alleged that the actions of the accused (petitioner herein) were found to be without merit and several cases were dismissed with adverse observations against him. As the accused (petitioner herein) had approached the Courts without exhausting the Rotary International’s internal remedies, his Rotary Club membership was eventually terminated in accordance with Rotary policy. Subsequently, the accused (petitioner herein) got an FIR registered through another person alleging tampering of ballots, in which the complainant was summoned. Thereafter, the complainant complied with the directions of the Court and was extended the concession of bail on the same day as per the orders of the Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court. Furthermore, with the intention to harm the reputation of the complainant, the accused persons conspired together and circulated a misleading and false letter among Rotary members and WhatsApp groups. It has been alleged therein that the complainant was taken into custody in order to create a false and damaging impression. On the account of the same, the complainant got distressed as also demands for clarification and pressure from Rotary officials. It has been further alleged in the complaint that the accused had no authority or locus to circulate such communication especially when his Rotary membership had already been terminated. As per the complainant, the deliberate circulation of false and defamatory material had caused irreparable damage to his reputation, dignity and standing in society as well within the Rotary International which necessitated him to file the instant complaint seeking prosecution of the accused under Section 500 IPC and compensation for the loss suffered due to their malicious and defamatory acts.
(ii) The application in question was filed by the petitioner (herein), seeking transfer of trial arising out of the above-said criminal complaint, relevant whereof reads thus:
“5. That the applicants are more than 88 years old and suffering from several ailments i.e. knee, liver, kidney and heart problems and living around 250 KM away from Panchkula at Dehradun (UTTRAKHAND) and it takes 5 to 6 hours continuous travelling for reaching Panchkula. But the presiding officer in connivance with the complainant and just to harass or humiliate fixing the matters twice in a week. That the LD magistrate has duly been approached
The apprehension of not getting a fair and impartial trial must be reasonable and not imaginary.
The court established that a mere allegation of bias or apprehension of injustice is insufficient for transferring a case; there must be reasonable and substantiated grounds for such a request.
Transfer of a criminal trial cannot be a routinely passed order and substantial grounds, based on sufficient material, need to exist for passing such an order. The court emphasized the need for exped....
The apprehension for transfer of a trial must be reasonable and not imaginary, and the power of transfer is to be sparingly exercised. Fair justice and the independence of the judiciary are essential....
Transfer of trial under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. requires substantiation of reasonable apprehension of unfair trial, considering the convenience of all parties involved.
Prayer for transfer can be allowed only when there is a well-substantiated apprehension that justice will not be dispensed impartially, objectively, and without any bias.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.