Case Transfer – Judicial Proceedings Not Only Be Fair But Also Appear Fair: Punjab and Haryana High Court
In a significant decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court ordered the transfer of a criminal case from Karnal to Sonipat, responding to concerns about the fairness of the trial proceedings. The judgment delivered by Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi focused on maintaining the perception of justice being served, as well as addressing procedural anomalies that surfaced during the trial.
The case originates from FIR No. 228 of 2015, registered under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 406, 418, 420, 466, 468, 471, 473, and 506, at Police Station Taraori. The case involves allegations of fraud, forgery, and criminal intimidation against the respondent, Badke Bhankaran Balakrishnan. The petitioner, Sumit Kumar Bindal, sought the transfer of the trial to another court, citing procedural irregularities and a lack of confidence in the current court’s ability to deliver an impartial verdict.
A pivotal issue in the case was the trial court’s decision to exhibit an agreement dated January 7, 2014 (Ex. DA) at a very late stage of the trial on March 6, 2023. This document, which had not been presented earlier, significantly impacted the proceedings. The petitioner moved applications for forensic analysis of the document and to produce additional evidence to counter its impact, but these applications were questioned for their maintainability and subsequently dismissed on merits.
The petitioner highlighted several procedural concerns, including the listing and adjournment of the case without proper cause list updates and the perceived undue haste of the trial court in proceeding with the case. These anomalies collectively created an apprehension regarding the fairness of the trial.
Justice Bedi underscored the principle that “justice must not only be done but it must also be seen to have been done,” referencing the precedent set in the case of Satish Jaggi v. State of Chhattisgarh. This principle was central to the decision to transfer the case to ensure the complainant’s confidence in the judicial process.
Justice Bedi remarked, “In the context of judicial proceedings, justice must not only be done but it must also be seen to have been done.” He added that transferring the trial was necessary to “allay the apprehension of the complainant-petitioner without casting any aspersions on the trial court”.
The High Court’s decision to transfer the trial underscores its commitment to ensuring the integrity of judicial proceedings. By addressing the procedural concerns and emphasizing the importance of the appearance of fairness, the judgment aims to bolster public confidence in the legal system. This transfer is expected to set a precedent for handling similar cases where procedural irregularities may compromise the perceived impartiality of the court.
Date of Decision: May 7, 2024
Sumit Kumar Bindal vs. Wadkesankaran Balakrishnan and anr.
