Punjab-Haryana High Court
Anil Aggarwal vs Brijeshwar Swarup And Another on 20 September, 2012
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
TA No.215 of 2012 (O&M)
Date of decision:20.09.2012.
& TA No. 216 of 2012
Anil Aggarwal ....Petitioner
versus
Brijeshwar Swarup and another ....Respondents
Present: Mr.Vivek Goel, Advocate, for
Ms. Neha Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate,
for the respondents.
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
----
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment ? No.
2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No.
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No.
----
K.Kannan, J. (Oral)
1. The petition for transfer is sought on the ground that the respondent No.1, who was earlier the President of the Bar Association, spells terror to the other side. The Judge has passed orders against the petitioner only because the respondent had been a counsel. Such like representations for transfer must come to a stop that have sinister portents to erode public confidence in the image of judiciary. The judges cannot not be shivering by the presence of a TA No.215 of 2012 (O&M) -2- lawyer, who is also a litigant, however, eminent he is to and there ought not to be a ground for such an apprehension by any person. The judicial tiers that exist afford sufficient redressal for any person, who is wronged and a presumption cannot be drawn on the suspected partiality of judges only because the petitioner has met with failures in all his prior forays in litigation.
2. Both the transfer applications are dismissed.
(K.KANNAN) JUDGE 20.09.2012 sanjeev