Judicial Recusals

The former Supreme Court justice recently refused to recuse himself from hearing a plea by a former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer to present further evidence to support his Gujarat High Court appeal against his conviction in a 1990 custodial death case.

What is Judicial Recusal?

• Recusal is removal of oneself as a judge or policy maker in a particular matter, especially because of a conflict of interest.
• It is a basic precept that no one should be a judge in his or her own case.
• Courts must keep the promise of dispensing fair and impartial justice, and must decide controversies without bias.
• Recent Example in this regard: In 2019, CJI Ranjan Gogoi refused to recuse himself for some adverse oral remarks, saying that the plea had ‘enormous potential to damage the institution’.
• Absence of statute: There is no statute laying down the minimum procedure which judges must follow in order to ensure the impartiality.

Why do judges recuse?

• Withdrawal: A judge can withdraw from a case if there is a potential conflict of interest, such as holding shares in a litigant company or having a prior or personal association with a party.
• Principle of due process of law: This practice stems from the principle of due process of law and the principle of justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done.
• Pecuniary Interest: The Supreme Court has adopted the Restatement of the Values of Judicial Life, which forbids a judge from deciding a case involving any entity where he holds pecuniary interest unless the concerned parties have no objections.