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
Filing Number
223/2026
Filing Date
06-Mar-2026
Registration No
105/2026
Registration Date
06-Mar-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
17-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 08-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SUKHMOHINDER SINGH SANDHU
Respondent(s)
-
1.CBI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Mar-2026
Copy Of Order
-
17-Mar-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.
-
17-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
14-Mar-2026
Copy Of Order
-
14-Mar-2026
Misc. cases
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
09-Mar-2026
Copy Of Order
-
09-Mar-2026
Misc. cases
Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (Pc Act) (Cbi)
-
06-Mar-2026
Copy Of Order
-
06-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 105/2026
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.
Explore other courts