Kerala High Court cautions litigant for levelling wild allegations of bias against trial judge; dismisses transfer petition

The Kerala High Court recently took strong exception to the practice of litigants making unsubstantiated allegations of bias against judges and judicial officers [Roshni Babu VB v Anil KB]..Justice CS Dias dismissed a plea that made such allegations against a trial judge, cautioned the petitioner to refrain from such actions in the future as the same undermines the dignity of the judge as well as the majesty of law. However, the single-judge chose not to impose any costs on the litigant."The petitioner cannot arm twist and browbeat the learned Judges to get things done in her own way. This Court sternly warns the petitioner to stop her habit of levelling unsubstantiated insinuations against the learned Judges and undermining their dignity and the majesty of law," the order stated..Justice Dias began the order with this excerpt from the decision of the Supreme Court in Haridas Das v. Usha Rani Banik.“Majesty of law continues to hold its head high notwithstanding such scurrilous attacks made by persons who feel that the law courts will absorb anything and everything, including attacks on their honesty, integrity and impartiality. But it has to be borne in mind that such divinity and magnanimity is not its weakness but its strength. It generally ignores irresponsible statements which are anything but legitimate criticism. It is to be noted that what is permissible is legitimate criticism and not illegitimate insinuation. No court can brook with equanimity something which may have tendency to interfere with the administration of justice.”Before concluding the order, he again referred to the Supreme Court's observations in that case reiterating,"These statements tend to scandalise and lower the authority of the courts and cannot be permitted because, for functioning of democracy, an independent judiciary to dispense justice without fear and favour is paramount. Its strength is the faith and confidence of the people in that institution. That cannot be permitted to be undermined because that will be against the public interest. Judiciary should not be reduced to the position of flies in the hands of wanton boys. Judge bashing is not and cannot be a substitute for constructive criticism.”.The Court made these observations while considering a plea moved by a woman seeking to transfer her divorce case from the trial judge who is currently seized of it.The petitioner, who is a lawyer, appeared in person and argued that her husband had filed a false case seeking divorce against her. Further, she alleged that the trial judge has passed a string of adverse orders against her in a biased and prejudicial manner, in collusion with her husband and his counsel on extraneous consideration. She argued that the trial judge lacks integrity and propriety, and his acts are unbecoming of a judicial officer..The High Court called for a report from the trial judge that went through the proceedings in the case before the family court. The report also stated that the petitioner was merely trying to prolong the proceedings but that the trial judge has no objections to the case being transferred..The Court noted from a host of precedents set by the Supreme Court that the person making allegations of bias against judges has the onus to substantiate the same.In the present case, the Court found that the petitioner has done no such thing. It saw that the petitioner had not challenged any of the adverse orders passed against her and is now attempting to indirectly attack the orders through the transfer petition."The petitioner has made a scathing attack on the learned Judge, questioning his integrity, honesty and impartiality. The reason; the learned Judge has passed a string of orders against her. There is no foundation or material to corroborate the accusation other than the bald and wild allegations in the transfer petition", the court observed.Accordingly, it dismissed the transfer plea..[Read Order]