The Delhi High Court highlighted concerns regarding the transfer of cases between courts, stating that such actions could have a lasting negative impact on a judge’s career. This perspective highlights the importance of thoughtful and judicious handling of case transfers within the legal system. The court’s emphasis on protecting judicial careers reflects broader discussions around judicial independence and fair judicial processes in India.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court recently expressed that transferring a case from one court to another, can potentially have severe long-term consequences on the career of a judicial officer. Such a transfer may unjustly cast doubt on the officer’s integrity and permanently tarnish their professional reputation. Therefore, the court emphasized that such transfers should not be commonly employed.
These remarks made while dismissing a petition that requested the transfer of a pending lawsuit from a district judge of a commercial court to another commercial court within the same district.
Read Also: India TV Journalist Rajat Sharma Files PIL Against Deepfake Videos: Delhi HC
Justice C. Hari Shankar of a single-judge bench noted in a May 7 ruling,
“The transfer of a case from the court currently overseeing it, despite having proper jurisdiction, is a matter of great concern. Such actions are generally avoided as they can cast doubts on the fairness and sometimes even the integrity of the presiding judge. This can be deeply demoralizing for the judge involved. A transfer order, while seemingly harmless, can have detrimental effects in practice.”
The high court stated that a case should only be transferred from its current jurisdiction if there is “solid, persuasive, and explicit evidence” suggesting that the judge handling the case might be “prejudiced or biased,” or if continuing the proceedings in that court would “inevitably lead to clear injustice for any party involved.”
Justice Shankar emphasized,
“A single instance of such a transfer could potentially tarnish the career of the involved judicial officer for a lifetime.”
Justice Shankar remarked,
“A litigant does not have the privilege to have their case heard in what they deem the most convenient court. It is not acceptable for a litigant to seek a different court simply because they find an order from the current court unfavourable. This kind of behaviour must be strongly discouraged.”
The high court expressed disapproval of such a practice, particularly in cases involving commercial litigation. The court emphasized that in such litigation, parties often employ various tactics to hinder the fair progress of the proceedings, and therefore, this specific practice should be discouraged.
Read Also: Delhi HC acknowledges Haldiram as a Renowned Brand
Justice Shankar declared,
“There is no justification for transferring CS (Comm) 525/2018. The petition is hereby rejected, and a fine of Rs. 50,000 is imposed, payable to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within one week from today.”
This decision highlights the judiciary’s effort to maintain fairness and discourage unnecessary legal actions that could undermine the judicial process and potentially damage the reputations and careers of dedicated judges.