Transfer of criminal cases requires reasonable apprehension of bias, not mere conjecture; overheard remarks do not substantiate claims of unfairness.

JUDGMENT :

Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajendra Babu Gaur, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and the learned AGA for the State.

2. This is an application filed under Section 407 Cr.P.C. seeking transfer of the proceedings of Session Trial No. 351 of 2015, arising out of case crime no. 256 of 2014, under Sections 307 , 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Hasayan, District-Hathras pending in the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge-Ist Hathras to any other competent Court in the same district.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that on 18.7.2024 when the applicant/informant came to the Court at Hathras for pairvi of his case he saw the accused/opposite party nos. 2 and 3 coming out from the chamber of the Presiding Officer, A.D.J.-I. Hathras and chatting that they have made an adjustment with the Presiding Officer for their acquittal in this matter and now they will be acquitted in this matter. Hence, the applicant/ informant is under genuine apprehension that he might not get justice from the said Court. The District and Sessions Judge, Hathras by an illegal and arbitrary order dated 2.8.2024 rejected the transfer application moved by the applicant and that is why the present transfer application has been moved before this Court. Hence, it is expedient in the interest of justice to transfer the said case from the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge-I, Hathras to any other competent Court at the same district.

4. Learned AGA and learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 have vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that there is no substance in the allegations made in the transfer application against the Presiding Officer of the Court concerned and the transfer application is liable to be rejected.

5. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

6. The allegation made in the instant transfer application is nothing but wastage of valuable time of this Court. Only on the ground of over hearing of some chatting between the accused persons the present transfer application has been moved. It is very surprising that the confidence of the applicant/ informant over the judicial system has been shaken only on the ground of some gossips made by the accused persons.

7. It has now become a fashion to make false allegations against the Presiding Officer of any Court and they are taken as helpless and easily approachable persons who may be approached by any public person in respect of their judicial functions. There is no convincing allegation having some substance against the Presiding Officer concerned in the instant matter and there is no valid ground to transfer the case.

8. To quote the views expressed by His Lordship Justice R.V. Raveendran, Judge, Supreme Court of India in the article 'Strengthening Justice Delivery System-Some Challenges & Solutions' published by the Karnataka Judicial Academy is relevant here, which is extracted as herein-below:

"When a Judge has a particular philosophy, as for example, when a Judge is an 'acquitting Judge' everyone in the legal fraternity will know that his judgments will have a high percentage of acquittals. Unscrupulous court- clerks and lawyers knowing about the 90% chance of acquittal will inform the accused or his relatives that they can influence the decision and take money in the name of the Judge. When the innocent Judge renders the judgment of acquittal, he earns the sobriquet of