SC rejects plea to transfer assault case against Dileep

The plea filed by the survivor, also a film actor, was earlier dismissed by the Kerala high court on September 22. The woman sought transfer of her trial from the court of principal district and sessions judge, Ernakulam to any other court.

New Delhi: Trial in criminal cases cannot be transferred on a mere apprehension of bias against a judicial officer, said the Supreme Court on Friday, as it dismissed a plea filed by the survivor in a sexual assault case involving a popular Malayalam actor seeking transfer of trial from a lower court in Ernakulam.

Senior advocate R Basant, who appeared for the survivor, alleged that the crime committed against her was at the behest of noted actor Dileep. The accusation was based on an audio clip between the said actor and a lawyer concerning the judge and her husband, a circle inspector in the state excise department facing departmental proceedings in a separate case. (PTI)

The plea filed by the survivor, also a film actor, was earlier dismissed by the Kerala high court on September 22. The woman sought transfer of her trial from the court of principal district and sessions judge, Ernakulam to any other court.

Senior advocate R Basant, who appeared for the survivor, alleged that the crime committed against her was at the behest of noted actor Dileep. The accusation was based on an audio clip between the said actor and a lawyer concerning the judge and her husband, a circle inspector in the state excise department facing departmental proceedings in a separate case.

“The kind of system that we are in has been polluted now that no judge is interested in a matter involving a criminal case. Any observation made by him is taken to mean otherwise both by the prosecution and the accused,” said the Supreme Court bench of justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar. “This is going on in the trial courts and high courts.”

The top court said that judges dealing with criminal matters, even in the Supreme Court, are subject to lot of criticism in the corridors but subordinate judges remain under tremendous fear. “In criminal matters, particularly those relating to bail, whatever order is passed by us, after what you hear what is spoken in the corridors, no judge will pass any order,” the bench said.

Stating that judges are responsible and work to serve justice, the bench added, “We work with all bonafides and do not allow what is spoken in the corridors get to us. But judges in subordinate courts are under tremendous fear.”

The bench noted that the high court was best placed to deal with such allegations and once the high court has found no bias, it will set a wrong precedent for the top court to step in.

“We all are responsible judges. If we start laying down transfer of cases on an apprehension of bias, no judicial officer would be able to work in an environment without fear,” the bench observed.

Basant said, “I am not on the conduct of the judge at all. My endeavour is to show this is not a fair trial going on. When this judge is shown the material, she pretends not to know her husband.”

The bench refused to entertain the survivor’s appeal against the HC order. “In such matters, high court has to take a call whether it is a fit case for transfer from one presiding officer to another,” it said.

If the high court has already held that no allegation is made out, the bench added, “If this court takes a call, it will lay down a bad precedent, unless facts are so startling that it requires our interference.”

Moreover, the court said if there is something wrong done by the husband of the judicial officer, it was wrong to impute any bias against the presiding officer.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Dileep, demanded the survivor’s plea to be dismissed with costs. “Several attempts have been made in the past by the same survivor to see that the trial does not proceed.” He further pointed out that the subordinate judge dealing with the matter was experienced and had already examined several witnesses in the case.

The survivor had approached the Kerala high court in July alleging an apprehension of bias pointing out the audio clip involving the actor who allegedly masterminded the sexual assault and the hostility faced by the prosecution from the trial judge. The prosecution had alleged that the survivor was sexually assaulted by one ‘Pulsar’ Suni at the behest of the accused actor who wanted to wreak vengeance. He nursed a grudge against the survivor for disclosing to his wife about a secret affair with another actress, the prosecution claimed.

Last month, the top court had allowed the trial court dealing with the case to conclude trial by January 31, 2023. This order was passed on a plea filed by Dileep alleging that the survivor was delaying the trial.