Recently, a Supreme Court judge recused herself from hearing a writ
petition filed against the premature release of 11 prisoners in the
Bilkis Bano case.
About the Recusal
An act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a
legal proceeding due to a Conflict of Interest (CoI) of the presiding
court official.
Process for Recusal
The decision to recuse generally comes from the judge only based on
his/her conscience and discretion to disclose any potential CoI.
Once a request is made for recusal, the decision to recuse or not
lies with the judge.
There are instances where judges have recused even based on
apprehensions by the parties to the case.
Also, there have been instances when judges refused to recuse
even in the potential CoI cases.
Possible cases of CoI-
Judge’s Background or prior experience.
Judge’s Personal knowledge about the parties or the facts of the
case.
Judge’s Rulings, comments or conduct.
Legal Provisions for Recusal
There are no formal rules governing recusals.
Although several Supreme Court judgments have dealt with the issue.
In Ranjit Thakur v Union of India (1987):
The SC held that the tests of the likelihood of bias are the
reasonableness of the apprehension in the mind of the party.
The 1999 charter on ‘Restatement of Values in Judicial Life’, a
code of ethics adopted by the Supreme Court also has such provisions.
