Recusal of Judges

Why in news?

• Recently, Chief Justice of India (CJI) N.V. Ramana recused himself from hearing a petition filed by Andhra Pradesh accusing Telangana of depriving its people of their legitimate share of water for drinking and irrigation

About Recusal of Judges

• Recusal is the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer.

Reason for Recusal:

• When there is a conflict of interest, a judge can withdraw from hearing a case to prevent creating a perception that he carried a bias while deciding the case.
• The conflict of interest can be in many ways such as:
  • Having a prior or personal association with a party involved in the case.
  • Appeared for one of the parties involved in a case.
  • Ex parte communications with lawyers or non-lawyers.
  • An appeal is filed in the SC against a judgement of a High Court (HC) that may have been delivered by the SC judge when he was in the HC.
  • In a matter of a company in which he holds shares unless he has disclosed his interest and there is no objection to it.

Rule for Recusal:

• There are no formal rules governing recusals, although several SC judgments have dealt with the issue.
• In Ranjit Thakur v Union of India (1987), the SC held that the test of the likelihood of bias is the reasonableness of the apprehension in the mind of the party. The judge needs to look at the mind of the party before him, and decide that he is biased or not.

PRELIMS QUESTION

Which of the following statements is/are correct regarding the recusal power of Judges in India?

1. It is explicitly mentioned in the Constitution of India  

2. The recusal power can be used only by the Judges of Supreme Court

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

(a) 1 only

(b) 2only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Answer