2015 (2) TMI 1319 - SC - Indian Laws

Territorial Jurisdiction - transfer of session case to any other Sessions Court - framing of charges under Indian Penal Code - HELD THAT - There are difference of opinion on the said issue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Transfer of Sessions Case No. 1006 of 2009 from one court to another based on apprehension of bias.
2. Consideration of fair trial and preconceived notions in the judicial process.

Issue 1: Transfer of Sessions Case:
The appeal before the Supreme Court arose from a dismissal order by a Single Judge of the High Court regarding the transfer of Sessions Case No. 1006 of 2009. The case involved offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989. The High Court initially discharged the accused, which was challenged by the complainant. The High Court set aside the discharge order and directed a fresh consideration by the trial court. The complainant then sought transfer of the case due to apprehensions of bias based on the earlier observations of the trial court. The Supreme Court, after considering the arguments, found that despite safeguards provided by the High Court, the apprehensions of the complainant were reasonable. The Court emphasized the importance of justice not only being done but also appearing to have been done. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and directed the transfer of the case to another court to ensure a fair trial.

Issue 2: Fair Trial and Preconceived Notions:
The dissenting judgment by Justice R. Banumathi focused on the lack of sufficient grounds for transfer. The Appellant sought the transfer based on apprehensions of bias, despite the High Court's direction for a fresh consideration by the trial court. Justice Banumathi highlighted that the Appellant did not challenge the order of remand or express bias concerns during that stage. The judge emphasized that a transfer should not be ordered based on mere presumptions or assumptions. Referring to a previous case, it was noted that trial courts operate under pressure and may make errors without improper motives. Justice Banumathi concluded that the Appellant failed to establish valid grounds for transfer and that the High Court's dismissal of the transfer petition was appropriate, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

In summary, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal for the transfer of Sessions Case No. 1006 of 2009 to ensure a fair trial, considering the reasonable apprehensions of bias expressed by the complainant. The dissenting judgment highlighted the lack of sufficient grounds for transfer and emphasized the importance of not ordering transfers based on mere assumptions or presumptions.