VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Palanisamy v. State Rep.By, Inspector of Police,

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
20 July 2026
Bench
D.Bharatha Chakravarthyauthor
Case no.
CRL OP 19224/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

Judgment

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and CRL.MP.Nos.12779 & 12741 of 2026

¶1Palanisamy ..Petitioner is both OPs

¶2Ettiyannan

¶3Gowri

¶4Muthu ..Petitioners in CRL.OP.No.19224/2026 Vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Attur, Salem District. (Crime No.30 of 2022) ..Respondent in Crl.OP.No.19224/2026 Kalaiyarasi ..Respondent in Crl.OP.No.19135/2026 Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 528 of BNSS, praying to set aside the orders dated 15.06.2026 passed in Tr.C.M.P.Nos.3174 of 2025 and 194 of 2026 respectively by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem. For Petitioner(s): (in both OPs) Mr.G.Krishnamurthy Page2 of 6 For Respondent(s): (in Crl.OP.No.19224/2026 Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Crl.Side) COMMON ORDER The prayers made in these criminal original petitions are to set aside the order dated 15.06.2026 passed in Tr.C.M.P.Nos.3174 of 2025 and 194 of 2026 respectively, by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem.

¶2The prayer sought in this petition is innocuous in nature, and as such, this petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself, without ordering notice to the private respondent.

¶3By the underlying applications, the petitioners sought to transfer the cases in C.C.No.203 of 2024 and D.V.C.No.6 of 2023 respectively, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Attur, to any other Judicial Magistrate. The primary ground on which the transfers are sought is an allegation of bias against the learned Presiding Officer. Page3 of 6

¶4Mr.G.Krishnamurthy, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners had earlier approached this Court challenging an order passed in a connected domestic violence proceeding, which was subsequently set aside. He further contended that during those domestic violence proceedings, the learned Judicial Magistrate allegedly remarked that unless the first petitioner clears the maintenance arrears, the Court would ensure that the criminal case pending in C.C.No.203 of 2024 would be appropriately disposed of. Apprehending bias on these grounds, the transfer applications were moved. The learned Principal Session Judge, upon considering the entire matter, held that casual remarks made by a Trial Judge during the course of proceedings cannot be treated as a reasonable ground to apprehend bias and consequently, dismissed the applications. The learned counsel further submitted that when an order is set aside by an appellate or revisional forum, the concerned Presiding Officer naturally tends to carry a grudge.

¶5Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the materials available on record. Page4 of 6

¶6In the judicial system, orders passed by subordinate fora are routinely set aside or modified by higher courts. It is the absolute right of an aggrieved party to challenge an order before a higher forum and such recourse does not create any personal animosity or grudge in the mind of a Presiding Officer. An apprehension of this nature cannot be deemed reasonable, rather, it is merely a misplaced perception of the petitioners. Presiding Officers are judicially trained to dispassionately consider matters strictly on their merits, completely uninfluenced by the fact that a previous order passed by them was challenged or set aside in appeal.

¶7In view of the above, finding no infirmity or illegality in the orders of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem, dated 15.06.2026 passed in Tr.C.M.P.Nos.3174 of 2025 and 194 of 2026, these criminal original petitions are devoid of merits and stand disposed of. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 20-07-2026 Sni Page5 of 6 To

1.Principal Sessions Judge, Salem.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Attur, Salem District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRL.OP.Nos.19224o&o19135oofo2026 D.BHARATHAoCHAKRAVARTHY,oJ. Sni CRL.OP.Nos.19224o&o19135oofo2026 andoCRL.MP.Nos.12779o&o12741oofo2026 20-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.