Case Note & Summary
The appellant wife and respondent husband were married on 16 November 1997 and had a son born on 7 July 2000. Differences arose between them, and negotiations for a settlement were ongoing in April-May 2012. The husband filed a custody petition (D-35/2012) in the Family Court, Mumbai, and obtained an ex parte injunction order. The wife appeared before the trial court on 24 January 2012 and was granted time to file a written statement. On 30 May 2012, the judge in Court Room No.5 ordered day-to-day hearing. On 15 June 2012, the judge took on record draft consent terms that were not finalized, discussing them as an out-of-court settlement. Subsequently, several ex parte orders were passed after preponing dates without notice to the wife, resulting in 29 hearing dates from 21 May 2012. The wife filed Misc. Application No.185 of 2012 seeking transfer of the petition from Court Room No.5 to any other court, which was dismissed by the Principal Judge on 30 August 2012. Aggrieved, the wife appealed under Section 19 of the Family Court Act. The High Court examined the circumstances, including the ex parte orders, preponement without notice, and the judge's conduct in discussing draft consent terms. The court held that these factors cumulatively gave rise to a reasonable apprehension in the wife's mind that she would not receive a fair trial. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Principal Judge to transfer the custody petition to any other court except Court Room No.5.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Transfer of Petition - Reasonable Apprehension of Bias - Section 19 of Family Court Act, 1984 - Wife sought transfer of custody petition from Court Room No.5 on grounds of ex parte orders, preponement of dates without notice, and judge's conduct suggesting bias - Court held that the cumulative circumstances created a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the wife that she would not get a fair trial - Directed transfer of the petition to any other court except Court Room No.5 (Paras 1-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the wife's apprehension of bias against the Presiding Judge of Court Room No.5, Family Court, Mumbai, was reasonable and justified, warranting transfer of the custody petition to another court.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned order dated 30/08/2012 set aside. Principal Judge, Family Court, Mumbai directed to transfer Custody Petition No. D-35/2012 from Court Room No.5 to any other court except Court Room No.5.
Law Points
- Transfer of case on ground of reasonable apprehension of bias
- Section 19 of Family Court Act
- 1984
- Principles of natural justice
- Fair trial
