Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, accused No.1 to 3 in Sessions Case No.164/2019 pending before the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, filed a petition under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking transfer of the case to another Sessions Court within the jurisdiction of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi. The petitioners were aggrieved by the rejection of their earlier transfer petition under Section 409 Cr.P.C. by the Principal District and Sessions Judge. The ground for transfer was that the trial judge had made certain remarks during the proceedings that indicated a predetermined mind against the accused, thereby creating a reasonable apprehension of bias. The petitioners argued that the trial judge's remarks, as recorded in the order sheets, suggested that the judge had already formed an opinion about their guilt, which would prejudice their right to a fair trial. The respondent-State opposed the transfer, contending that the remarks were made in the context of the case and did not indicate bias. The High Court examined the order sheets and found that the trial judge had made observations such as 'the accused are not entitled to any relief' and 'the case is serious in nature', which could be interpreted as pre-judging the matter. The court applied the test of reasonable apprehension: whether a reasonable person, with knowledge of the facts, would apprehend bias. The court held that the remarks could create a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the accused that they would not get a fair trial. The court emphasized that the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. Accordingly, the court allowed the petition and directed the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi to assign Sessions Case No.164/2019 to any other Sessions Court having jurisdiction, except the court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Transfer of Case - Section 407 Cr.P.C. - Reasonable Apprehension of Bias - The petitioners/accused sought transfer of Sessions Case No.164/2019 from the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, alleging that the trial judge made remarks indicating a predetermined mind against them. The High Court held that the test is whether a reasonable person, with knowledge of the facts, would apprehend bias. The court found that the trial judge's remarks, as recorded in the order sheets, could create a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the accused that they would not get a fair trial. The court allowed the transfer petition and directed the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi to assign the case to any other Sessions Court having jurisdiction. (Paras 1-10) B) Constitutional Law - Right to Fair Trial - Article 21 of Constitution of India - Apprehension of Bias - The court emphasized that the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right under Article 21. Even if the judge is not actually biased, the appearance of bias is sufficient to warrant transfer if it would shake the confidence of the accused in the fairness of the trial. The court relied on the principle that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sessions Case No.164/2019 pending before the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi should be transferred to another court of competent jurisdiction on the ground of reasonable apprehension of bias.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi is directed to assign Sessions Case No.164/2019 to any other Sessions Court having jurisdiction, except the court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi.
Law Points
- Transfer of criminal case under Section 407 Cr.P.C.
- Apprehension of bias
- Fair trial under Article 21 of Constitution of India
- Reasonable apprehension test
