Judge who ordered FIR against Sambhal cops transferred thrice in eight months, row erupts

The immediate trigger for the controversy was an order passed by CJM Vibhanshu Sudheer on January 9, directing registration of an FIR against police officers, including then circle officer Anuj Chowdhury, in connection with the shooting of a youth during the Sambhal violence of November 2024. (File photo)

• CJM Vibhanshu Sudheer transferred after ordering FIR in Sambhal violence case
• Opposition, lawyers allege executive interference, seek judicial intervention
• Congress calls transfer an attack on judicial independence, urges Supreme Court action

Did our AI summary help?

The transfer of Sambhal’s Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Vibhanshu Sudheer, days after he ordered registration of an FIR against police personnel over the 2024 communal violence, has snowballed into a major political and legal flashpoint.

With Sudheer having been shifted three times in eight months, the move has drawn sharp reactions from opposition parties, lawyers’ bodies, and civil society, all alleging executive interference in the judiciary.

The Flashpoint: FIR order, sudden transfer

The immediate trigger for the controversy was an order passed by CJM Vibhanshu Sudheer on January 9, directing registration of an FIR against police officers, including then circle officer Anuj Chowdhury, in connection with the shooting of a youth during the Sambhal violence of November 2024.

Within days, Sudheer was transferred out of Sambhal and posted as Civil Judge (Senior Division) in Sultanpur. The timing of the move sparked protests by lawyers and drew fierce criticism from opposition parties, who argued that the transfer was punitive rather than administrative.

Sudheer had only been posted to Sambhal from Agra on September 18, 2025. His removal within barely four months, and after a sensitive judicial order against police officials, became the central point of contention.

Political reaction: Congress alleges assault on judiciary

The Congress was quick to attack the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led Uttar Pradesh government, calling the transfer a direct blow to judicial independence. Addressing a press conference in New Delhi, Congress leader Pawan Khera described the move as “not an administrative act, it is a calculated act of institutional vandalism and a direct assault on judicial independence.”

Khera urged the Supreme Court and the Allahabad High Court to step in on their own motion, saying judicial intervention was essential to protect constitutional balance. He warned that the issue went far beyond one officer’s posting. “This issue goes far beyond the transfer of an individual judicial officer; it strikes at the core of judicial independence and the constitutional balance between the judiciary and the executive,” he said.

Khera also aimed at the government’s handling of the Sambhal violence, alleging that police firing during the clashes had led to the deaths of protesters from the Muslim community. Calling the incident “a shocking, condemnable and custodial killing-like incident,” he said it demanded an independent and impartial probe.

According to him, the sequence of events showed a pattern. “The BJP has perfected a dangerous and cynical political formula --  manufacture communal tension, unleash State violence, protect the perpetrators and then crush any institution that dares to demand accountability,” Khera alleged.

The replacement controversy and swift reversal

Adding fuel to the fire was the brief appointment of another judicial officer as Sudheer’s replacement. Aditya Singh, who had earlier directed a survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid in 2024, was named as CJM, Sambhal. The appointment triggered immediate outrage, given that the survey had preceded the violence in which four people were killed due to gunfire.

Although Singh’s appointment was reversed within 48 hours and he was sent back to his earlier posting, the Congress said the episode revealed deeper intent. Khera claimed it “lays bare the BJP government’s systematic effort to bend judicial administration to its political will, weaponise transfers as instruments of control and erode the independence of the judiciary.”

Soon after, the Allahabad High Court issued a fresh notification appointing Deepak Kumar Jaiswal as the new CJM of Sambhal. Singh was shifted again, while Sudheer remained posted in Sultanpur. The reshuffle was part of a larger transfer exercise involving more than 600 judicial officers across Uttar Pradesh.

Lawyers take to streets

The backlash was not limited to political circles. Lawyers in Sambhal staged protests near the Chandausi police station and the district collectorate, raising slogans against the state government and terming the transfer “the killing of justice.”

Former District Sessions Court Bar Association president Rajesh Yadav praised Sudheer’s tenure, saying he had strengthened the justice delivery system. “Judge Vibhanshu Sudheer did exemplary work for the justice delivery system in the district. During his tenure, cases were decided within eight days,” Yadav said, demanding that the transfer be cancelled.

Another advocate, Roshan Singh Yadav, alleged that the move was made under pressure. “No one has the right to punish a good judge,” he said, appealing to the chief justice of the high court to intervene.

Sambhal violence

The controversy is rooted in the violence that erupted on November 24, 2024, in Sambhal’s Kot Garvi locality during a court-ordered survey of the Mughal-era Jama Masjid. The survey was part of a legal process examining claims that the mosque stood on the site of a former temple. Clashes broke out, leading to deaths from gunfire and injuries to several people, including police personnel.

Opposition leaders, including Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, have also called on the higher judiciary to take suo motu cognisance of Sudheer’s transfer. “I hope that the Supreme Court and High Court will take suo motu cognisance of this matter,” Yadav said.

(With agency inputs)