MP High Court Says Transfer Pleas Cannot Rest On Personal Doubts About Judicial Orders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that dissatisfaction with a judicial order or disagreement over how submissions are recorded cannot, by itself, justify transfer of pending cases from one Bench to another. The Court observed that allegations questioning judicial impartiality must be supported by credible and objective material rather than personal assumptions or perceptions.

Justice Himanshu Joshi passed the order while dismissing an application filed by a litigant seeking transfer of his writ petition and connected matters to another Bench. The applicant had argued that certain submissions made by his counsel in an earlier criminal proceeding were not reflected in a judicial order, leading to apprehensions regarding fairness. He also objected to subsequent listing of his pending writ petition before the same Bench.

Rejecting the plea, the Court clarified that judicial orders are not expected to reproduce every argument advanced during hearings, especially submissions that do not directly affect adjudication of the dispute. The Bench noted that courts are required to record material facts, relevant legal issues, and substantive contentions necessary for deciding the matter.

The Court further observed that roster allocation and listing of cases are governed by administrative procedures independent of judicial decision-making. It cautioned that unfounded allegations against courts, particularly without supporting material, risk weakening public confidence in the justice delivery system.

While dismissing the transfer request for lack of merit, the Court directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice on the administrative side in light of the allegations made in the application.