Since there are no formal rules governing the process, it is often left to individual judges to record reasons for recusal. Some judges disclose the reasons in open court; in some cases, the reasons are apparent.
The decision to recuse generally comes from the judge herself as it rests on the conscience and discretion of the judge to disclose any potential conflict of interest.
In some circumstances, lawyers or parties in the case bring it up before the judge. If a judge recuses, the case is listed before the Chief Justice for allotment to a fresh Bench.
When there is a conflict of interest, a judge can withdraw from hearing a case to prevent creating a perception that she carried a bias while deciding the case.
The conflict of interest can be in many ways — from holding shares in a company that is a litigant to having a prior or personal association with a party involved in the case.
Another instance for recusal is when an appeal is filed in the Supreme Court against a judgement of a High Court that may have been delivered by the SC judge when she was in the HC.
The practice stems from the cardinal principle of due process of law that nobody can be a judge in her own case.
Fairness and impartiality are the fundamental qualities to be possessed by a judge in India. Comment. (150 words)
Introduction- role of judiciary in ensuring justice