IMPORTANT POINT
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.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania, J.

1. Heard.

2. Present application has been filed under Section 407 Cr.P.C./Section 447 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short "BNSS") for transfer of the Case No. 16166 of 2013 (State vs. Rajesh Pratap Singh and Another), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 0324 of 2023 under Section 323, 504, 506 & 307 IPC, P.S.-Kotwali Nagar, District-Pratapgarh, pending before C.J.M., Pratapgarh to any other district of Uttar Pradesh.

3. The facts, relevant as indicated in the affidavit filed in support of application seeking transfer of the case in issue is to the effect that the opposite party No.2/Guarav Singh, Advocate are a practicing Advocate in the District-Pratapgarh and as such he with the help of other Advocates beaten the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 on 01.06.2023 and thereafter with the help of Police personnel lodged the false FIR against the applicants alongwith two unknown persons on 01.06.2023 registered as Case Crime No. 0324 of 2023 under Section 323, 504, 506, 394 & 307 IPC, P.S.-Kotwali City, District-Pratapgarh and on account of pressure of opposite party No.2, the Advocate engaged by the applicants is not doing smoothly pairavi on behalf of the applicants before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh.

4. This application has been filed with a prayer to transfer the criminal case from District-Pratapgarh to any other district in the State of Uttar Pradesh and in view of the prayer sought, this Court finds it appropriate to take note of the observations made in this regard by the Constitutional Courts.

5. Mere suspicion by the party that he will not get justice would not justify transfer. There must be a reasonable apprehension to that effect. There must be a reasonable apprehension to that effect. A judicial order made by a Judge legitimately cannot be made foundation for a transfer of case. Mere presumption of possible apprehension should not and ought not be the basis of transfer of any case from one case to another. It is only in very special circumstances, when such grounds are taken, the Court must find reasons exist to transfer a case, not otherwise. Reference can be made to the judgment(s) passed in the case of Rajkot Cancer Society vs. Municipal Corporation, Rajkot, AIR 1988 Guj 63; Pasupala Fakruddin and Anr. vs. Jamia Masque and Anr., AIR 2003 AP 448; and Nandini Chatterjee vs. Arup Hari Chatterjee, AIR 2001 Cul 26; as also the judgment dated 12.11.2014 passed in Transfer Application (Civil) No. 519 of 2014 (Amit Agarwal vs. Atul Gupta).

6. A Judge is not expected to remain silent during course of hearing and not to express any opinion. A sphinx like attitude is not expected from a Presiding Officer. There has to be an effective discussion and effective attempt to conciliate or to clarify the misunderstanding or to get the issues clear, so that the issues can be settled or a just and proper decision can be arrived at. If in that process the Presiding Officer would make a statement it should not be misunderstood as an expression of decision. Judges' opinions during hearing of case do not automatically justify transfer. [Smt. Sangeetha S. Chugh vs. Ram Narayan V. and others, AIR 1995 Kar 112 and Official Assignee, Madras vs. Inspector-General of Registration, Bangalore and Anr., AIR 1981 Mad 54; Gujarat Electricity Board & Anr. vs. Atmaram Sungomal Poshani; AIR 1989 SC 1433 (1436).]

7. Certain observations made by a Judge in an earlier case can never be made a ground for transfer of the case as held in G. Lakshmi Ammal vs. Elumalai Chettiar and Ors, AIR 1981 Mad 24. The allegations of bias of Presiding Officer, if made the basis for transfer of case, before exercising power under Section 408 Cr.P.C., the Court must be satisfied that the apprehension of bias or prejudice is bona fide and reasonable. The expression of apprehension, must be proved /substantiated by circumstances and material placed by such applicant before the Court. It cannot be taken as granted that mere alle