Justice Navin Chawla, in rejecting the plea, noted that while it is recognised that justice must not only be done but also appear to be done, any apprehension of not receiving justice in a particular court must be founded on reason and not just an overly sensitive mindset.
The petitioner’s argument, based on alleged remarks made by the Family Judge during hearings, was not deemed sufficient grounds for transfer, especially considering the petitioner’s vacillating stance in prosecuting the proceedings before the Family Court.
The court referred to the Supreme Court decision in R Balakrishna Pillai vs State of Kerala, pointing out that a mere allegation of apprehension should be reasonable, genuine, and justifiable.
The court observed that the petitioner’s plea was an attempt to delay the proceedings and found no valid grounds to transfer the matters to another court. The petitions were subsequently dismissed.
–IANS
spr/rad
