The Supreme Court in Nazma Naz v. Rukhsana Bano case held that any fault or shortcoming on the part of the staff of the Subordinate Court or any delay in compliance by the Court is not by itself a reason to transfer a case.
In the instant case, on an application stating that their discharge application is not being decided, the Allahabad High Court transferred a criminal case from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge First, Aligarh to the corresponding Court at Mathura because the High Court was dissatisfied with the conduct of the staff of the Subordinate Court in not taking on record an order passed by it. It even asked the trial judge to appear in person and submit an apology.
The Supreme Court while setting aside the Allahabad High Court’s order said that
“It is noticed that transfer was sought by the accused persons, inter alia, with the grievances that the discharge application moved by some of the accused persons was not being decided and they were asked to appear before the Court at Aligarh on every date. The High Court had earlier ordered for disposal of the discharge application but the same remained pending.
However, the proceedings in the High Court swelled to the extent of the Court asking the Trial Judge to appear in-person, who was required to appear and submit apology.”
“In the totality of circumstances of the case, we do not wish to make any comments on the nature of proceedings this matter has undergone but, we are clearly of the view that because of any fault or shortcoming on the part of the staff of the Subordinate Court and for that matter, any delay in compliance by the Court were hardly the reasons for the High Court to immediately adopt the course of transferring the matter and that too, to a different station.”