The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking guidelines for the recusal of judges, emphasising that the decision to recuse from a case lies solely with the concerned judge [Chandraprabha & Ors v. Union of India & Anr]..The Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said,“Jurisdiction under Article 142 (Supreme Court's power to do 'complete justice' in any case) cannot be invoked to frame guidelines for recusal of judges.".The petitioners had approached the Court last year as well, seeking a probe into the recusal of Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court in a batch of three petitions.The plea had been withdrawn after the Court observed that such prayers were capable of sending “wrong signals.” However, they had been granted a liberty to file a fresh plea limited to seeking guidelines on recusal..During today's hearing, the petitioners' counsel, Advocate Nisha Tiwari, argued that guidelines were necessary to prevent arbitrary recusals and to ensure transparency. She cited practices from other jurisdictions where judges are required to disclose potential conflicts in advance. However, the Bench firmly rejected the idea of imposing mandatory guidelines on recusal, noting that such decisions are inherently subjective.“As far as recusal of judges is concerned, it is a matter of discretion of the concerned judges. It is for them to decide whether reasons for recusal are to be disclosed.".On the allegation that the case before the High Court had not been listed even after nine months of Justice Nagaprasanna's recusal, the Court permitted the petitioners to approach the High Court Chief Justice.“We permit the petitioners to move the Chief Justice of the Hon’ble High Court to get her matter listed. We are sure that if such an application is made, the Chief Justice will assign a bench,” the top court ordered. .[Read Live Coverage]
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking guidelines for the recusal of judges, emphasising that the decision to recuse from a case lies solely with the concerned judge [Chandraprabha & Ors v. Union of India & Anr]..The Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said,“Jurisdiction under Article 142 (Supreme Court's power to do 'complete justice' in any case) cannot be invoked to frame guidelines for recusal of judges.".The petitioners had approached the Court last year as well, seeking a probe into the recusal of Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court in a batch of three petitions.The plea had been withdrawn after the Court observed that such prayers were capable of sending “wrong signals.” However, they had been granted a liberty to file a fresh plea limited to seeking guidelines on recusal..During today's hearing, the petitioners' counsel, Advocate Nisha Tiwari, argued that guidelines were necessary to prevent arbitrary recusals and to ensure transparency. She cited practices from other jurisdictions where judges are required to disclose potential conflicts in advance. However, the Bench firmly rejected the idea of imposing mandatory guidelines on recusal, noting that such decisions are inherently subjective.“As far as recusal of judges is concerned, it is a matter of discretion of the concerned judges. It is for them to decide whether reasons for recusal are to be disclosed.".On the allegation that the case before the High Court had not been listed even after nine months of Justice Nagaprasanna's recusal, the Court permitted the petitioners to approach the High Court Chief Justice.“We permit the petitioners to move the Chief Justice of the Hon’ble High Court to get her matter listed. We are sure that if such an application is made, the Chief Justice will assign a bench,” the top court ordered. .[Read Live Coverage]
