The Delhi High Court held that an unfavourable judgment cannot be treated as proof of judicial bias.
It clarified that aggrieved parties must seek legal remedies instead of demanding transfer of cases.
In an important ruling, the Delhi High Court has clarified that just because a litigant receives an unfavourable order, it cannot be used as a reason to seek transfer of a case on allegations of judicial bias.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee made this observation while dismissing a petition filed by a woman who wanted her matrimonial case to be transferred from one Mahila Court to another. The Court emphasised that legal remedies are available if a party is dissatisfied with an order, and such dissatisfaction alone does not indicate bias on the part of the judge.
The order, dated April 7, came after the petitioner challenged a decision of the Principal and District Judge, who had earlier rejected her request for transfer. The High Court noted that the lower court had passed a detailed and well-reasoned order while refusing the transfer plea.
The case involved allegations of cruelty under the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner’s husband and mother-in-law. However, both had already been discharged in the criminal proceedings. The High Court observed that this discharge could not be treated as evidence of bias by the judge handling the matrimonial case.
Importantly, the Court highlighted that the burden to prove bias lies on the person making such allegations. Mere assumptions or dissatisfaction with earlier outcomes are not enough to question judicial impartiality.
Reiterating this principle, the Court stated,
“Even otherwise, since the said order(s) were passed by a Court of law in discharge of the duties, merely because it was not a favourable order in favour of the petitioner does/ cannot involve an element of bias, all the more whence it is always open for the petitioner to take recourse to the appropriate remedies as available to her in accordance with law,”.
The High Court further observed that the petitioner was attempting to raise the same issues again, which had already been addressed and rejected by the Principal Judge through a reasoned and speaking order.
Dismissing the plea, the Court made it clear that repeated attempts to challenge settled issues without valid grounds cannot be entertained. The ruling reinforces the principle that allegations of judicial bias must be supported by strong and credible evidence, and cannot be based solely on unfavourable judicial decisions.
This judgment serves as a reminder that the appropriate course for an aggrieved party is to pursue legal remedies such as appeal or revision, rather than seeking transfer of cases on unsubstantiated claims of bias.
Click Here to Read More Reports on CJI Surya Kant
