Can’t expect ‘sphinx-like’ attitude from judge: Allahabad High Court rejects case transfer plea over remarks during hearing

‘No evidence’

• The high court observed that there was no contemporaneous material, order-sheet entry, or any other evidence to substantiate the alleged oral remark.
• Even assuming such an observation had been made, the court said it could at best reflect a tentative view, an effort to facilitate settlement, or judicial engagement during the hearing.
• Even if some observation was made, such remarks may at best reflect “a tentative view, a suggestion for exploring settlement, or an attempt to test the stand” of the parties, the Allahabad High Court observed.
• The bench emphasised that judges are expected to actively engage with matters by asking questions, seeking clarifications, and indicating prima facie impressions during hearings.
• Mere observations made in the course of proceedings, “unless demonstrably indicative of a closed mind or final determination”, can’t be construed as evidence of bias to vitiate the proceedings, it held.

• Tested on the touchstone of a reasonable and informed observer, the court remarked that the apprehension expressed by the applicant did not rise beyond a subjective perception.
• The Allahabad High Court cautioned that transfer applications based on unsubstantiated allegations against judicial officers could undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
• Such pleas resting on unsubstantiated assertions carry the potential to undermine confidence in the judicial process and should not be lightly entertained, the court noted.
• The Allahabad High Court held that the apprehension sought to be projected by the applicant was wholly subjective, speculative, and devoid of any reasonable or cogent foundation.
• It further noted that accepting such allegations would open the door to litigants seeking transfer on tenuous grounds.
• The court cannot permit its process to be invoked in a manner that “undermines the confidence in the institutional framework of the judiciary,” the court said.
• The Allahabad High Court, therefore, dismissed the transfer plea and directed the court concerned to dispose of the pending appeal expeditiously.

Grounds for transfer

The petitioner had sought transfer of the case on two grounds. Firstly, it was alleged that during the proceedings, when the case was fixed for hearing, the applicant’s counsel sought a short adjournment; however, the court proceeded to hear the respondent.

It was further argued that, while fixing the next date, an oral observation was made by the presiding officer to the applicant’s representative to the effect that arrangements be made for payment to the respondent.

The petitioner contended that such observation, in the backdrop of the ongoing adjudication, gave rise to a reasonable apprehension in their mind that the matter may not receive an impartial consideration.

Opposing the transfer application, the counsel for the respondent argued that the plea was wholly misconceived and was instituted with the sole object of delaying the proceedings in the pending arbitration appeal.

Referring to the order sheets forming part of the record, it was urged that the conduct of the applicant reflected a consistent pattern of seeking repeated adjournments on varying and untenable grounds, thereby delaying the proceedings.