Chapter XXXVI
Section 479 CrPC: Cases in which Judge or Magistrate is personally interested
New Law Update (2024)
Section 532 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural – Trial / Charge
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
No Judge or Magistrate shall, except with the permission of the Court to which an appeal lies from his Court, try or commit for trial any case to or in which he is a party, or personally interested, and no Judge or Magistrate shall hear an appeal from any judgment or order passed or made by himself.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Landmark Judgements
Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India (1987):
While not directly interpreting Section 479 CrPC, this landmark Supreme Court case emphatically upheld the principles of natural justice, including the fundamental rule ‘nemo judex in causa sua’ (no man shall be a judge in his own cause). The Court stressed that justice must not only be done but must also manifestly be seen to be done, reinforcing the imperative of judicial impartiality that Section 479 seeks to ensure.
Subal Chandra Ghosh v. R.I.P. Singh (1966 Calcutta):
This Calcutta High Court judgment, interpreting Section 556 of the erstwhile CrPC (a predecessor to Section 479), elucidated the scope of ‘personally interested.’ The Court held that even a slight pecuniary interest or any other interest that could reasonably give rise to a suspicion of bias would disqualify a Judge or Magistrate from trying a case, underscoring the strict standards of impartiality required by law.