Live
- Sunny Leone's Name Used in Fraud Under Chhattisgarh’s Mahtari Vandan Yojana
- Gold Business Fraud Uncovered in Atmakur, Wanaparthy
- Rachakonda Police Seize Rs.88 Crore Worth Drugs, Arrest 521 Accused
- Sriram Krishnan Appointed Senior Policy Advisor for AI at the White House
- Cyclone alert at seven ports in Tamil Nadu; rain, strong winds expected
- Uttarakhand CM to attend MP govt's 'Jan Kalyan Parv' in Sagar today
- Sri Jagdamba Pearls Expands Presence with the launch of its Second Store in Bengaluru at Lulu Mall
- Congress remembers Dalits only in bad times: Mayawati taunts Rahul Gandhi on Parbhani visit
- Have time for jailed leaders but none for achievers: BJP slams Delhi govt over chess champion’s pain
- Alliance University holds 13th Convocation, 1145 students receive degrees
Judges cannot be browbeaten by litigant, warns Kerala High Court
Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court warned that judges cannot be browbeaten with vague allegations of bias to suit a litigant's convenience.
Kochi: The Kerala High Court warned that judges cannot be browbeaten with vague allegations of bias to suit a litigant's convenience.
A bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas made the observation while imposing a Rs 15,000 fine on a man who sought to transfer his matrimonial cases from the family court in Thalassery to the family court in Vadakara on allegations that the presiding officer (family court judge) in Thalassery was biased against him.
"A judicial officer cannot be browbeaten to suit the convenience of a party to a case. Unless the allegations of bias against a judicial officer are sturdy and impregnable, courts cannot rely on mere apprehensions to transfer cases from one court to another. In fact, meritless allegations of bias against a judicial officer ought to be sternly and ruthlessly dealt with," the bench said, adding that the same litigant had earlier raised similar allegations of bias against the earlier presiding officer also.
"The similarity of allegations raised against two different Presiding Officers who dealt with petitioner’s cases is a clear indication of petitioner’s calumny. The various allegations raised by the petitioner against the Presiding Officer are without any merit. Such vituperative denigration of a judicial officer by a litigant has to be dealt with sternly and cannot be tolerated under any circumstances whatsoever," the High Court said.
The petitioner (man) claimed that the presiding judge of the Thalassery family court had shown favouritism towards his wife, especially on matters like maintenance and custody, suggesting a clear bias against him.
After registering a complaint with the High Court Registrar General challenging the judge’s impartiality, he then sought to transfer all his pending matrimonial cases from the Thalassery family court to Vadakara.
The High Court, however, took a strong position that accusations based on mere dissatisfaction with rulings would not justify case transfer and dismissed his plea.
"A mere allegation of bias by itself can weaken the very edifice of the judicial system and even erode the confidence of the Officer," it said,
"This Court also firmly believes that the transfer petition is a ploy to delay the proceedings and to browbeat the Presiding Officer from issuing orders in the various petitions pending consideration. Such conduct has to be dealt with, with iron hands and must be visited with costs," it added, dismissing the petition and also imposing a fine of Rs 15,000 on the petitioner.
