In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has nullified the transfer of the Bhushan Steel money laundering case, which had been reassigned from the judge who allegedly made a controversial remark. The judge in question reportedly told court staff, “ED (Enforcement Directorate) matters main kaun si bail hoti hai?”—a rhetorical query implying that bail is rarely granted in such cases.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma clarified that the judge’s comment did not indicate any bias toward the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The High Court emphasized the confidentiality of conversations between judges and their court staff, underscoring that these exchanges should not be construed as evidence of partiality. Preserving the dignity of judges and maintaining public confidence in the judiciary were cited as critical reasons for this decision.
The High Court directed that the case be returned to the District Judge for reconsideration, taking into account its observations. This ruling followed the original transfer order by Principal District and Sessions Judge Anju Bajaj Chandna, who had reassigned the case on May 1, citing concerns over potential bias raised by one of the accused, Ajay S Mittal.
Mittal argued that the judge’s offhand comment, overheard by his wife during court proceedings, suggested a prejudiced view against granting bail in ED cases. Despite this, the High Court found that the apprehensions of bias were unsubstantiated.
Representatives for the ED, including Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain and advocate Kartik Sabharwal, opposed the transfer. Senior Advocates Sandeep Sethi and Mohit Mathur, along with other legal representatives, appeared for Mittal.
The High Court’s decision underscores the importance of protecting judicial integrity and ensuring that transfers are not influenced by unfounded perceptions of bias.
