SUKHMOHINDER SINGH SANDHU vs CBI — 105/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 448. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 17th March 2026.

MISC DJ ASJ - MISC. CASES FOR DJ ASJ

CNR: DLCT110002232026

Case disposed

Filing Number

223/2026

Filing Date

06-03-2026

Registration No

105/2026

Registration Date

06-03-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge PC Act CBI, Rouse Avenue

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI)

Decision Date

17th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 448

Petitioner(s)

SUKHMOHINDER SINGH SANDHU

Respondent(s)

CBI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI)

17-03-2026

Disposed

14-03-2026

Misc. cases

09-03-2026

Misc. cases

06-03-2026

Misc. cases

Final Orders / Judgements

17-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
17-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER

The court dismissed Sukhmohinder Singh Sandhu's transfer petition under Section 448 BNSS, rejecting claims of judicial bias based on alleged procedural irregularities. The court found that the trial judge's reference to the complainant was ordinary courtroom conduct, any ordersheet discrepancy was administratively corrected, and dismissing an interim application without hearing had no legal merit since prior High Court directions already addressed the issues raised. Given the case's 32-year pendency since 1994, further transfers would cause unnecessary delay contrary to justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

06-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
09-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
14-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed Sukhmohinder Singh Sandhu's transfer petition under Section 448 BNSS, rejecting claims of judicial bias based on alleged procedural irregularities. The court found that the trial judge's reference to the complainant was ordinary courtroom conduct, any ordersheet discrepancy was administratively corrected, and dismissing an interim application without hearing had no legal merit since prior High Court directions already addressed the issues raised. Given the case's 32-year pendency since 1994, further transfers would cause unnecessary delay contrary to justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge PC Act CBI, Rouse Avenue All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case