Transparency worries: Judges ditch cases midway without giving reasons | Latest News India - Hindustan Times
close_game
close_game

Transparency worries: Judges ditch cases midway without giving reasons

Hindustan Times | BySatya Prakash and Bhadra Sinha, New Delhi
Mar 17, 2016 09:41 AM IST

Indian judiciary is witnessing a spike in judges choosing not to hear cases without giving any reasons. This month alone, three judges of the Supreme Court opted out of cases before them.

The judiciary is witnessing a spike in judges choosing not to hear cases without giving any reasons. This month alone, three judges of the Supreme Court opted out of cases before them. But no one knows why.

Supreme Court of India. There has been an increase in the number of judges recusing themselves from hearing cases without giving any reasons.(Hindustan Times)
Supreme Court of India. There has been an increase in the number of judges recusing themselves from hearing cases without giving any reasons.(Hindustan Times)

In some of these cases, the judges had heard the matters for several months.

Hindustan Times - your fastest source for breaking news! Read now.

On March 10, justice V Gopala Gowda recused himself from hearing the CBI’s challenge to a 2010 Allahabad high court verdict dropping criminal conspiracy charges against BJP leaders including LK Advani and others in the Babri Masjid demolition case. In February, he had himself given this date to hear the matter.

This happened two days after Justice J Chelameswar opted out of a case pertaining to Bengaluru blast accused Abdul Nazir Maudany. In the open court, the judge – who had heard the matter for almost two years – simply adjourned the matter but the written order said it would be listed before another bench.

In recent years, there have been many instances from high courts where judges referred cases to the chief justice for sending them to another bench.

Should judges disclose the reasons for recusal? Do citizens have a right to know why a particular judge has opted out of a case?

“Being an institution whose hallmark is transparency, it is only proper that the judge discharging high and noble duties, at least broadly indicate the reasons for recusing from the case… it is the constitutional duty, as reflected in one’s oath, to be transparent and accountable, and hence, a judge is required to indicate reasons for his recusal from a particular case,” justice Kurian Joseph said in his verdict on the National Judicial Appointments Commission.

“Reasons for recusal must be assigned, whether they are personal or public,” says senior advocate Rajiv Dhavan.

“In a large number of cases, judges recuse themselves because either they have dealt with it as a judge or as an advocate. The reasons are often explicit without being put to writing. The conflict is recognised by the judge and the lawyer in the case. But in all other cases they must disclose the reasons,” says Dhavan.

Former secretary of the Supreme Court bar association Ayshwaria Bhatti says, “Now recusals have become quite mysterious. Nobody knows whether it’s a recusal order. Recusal requests were also never made the way they are being made these days. Judges should disclose reasons.”

Unveiling Elections 2024: The Big Picture', a fresh segment in HT's talk show 'The Interview with Kumkum Chadha', where leaders across the political spectrum discuss the upcoming general elections. Watch now!

Get Current Updates on India News, Election 2024, Arvind Kejriwal News Live, Bihar Board 10th Result 2024 Live along with Latest News and Top Headlines from India and around the world.
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Share this article
SHARE
Story Saved
Live Score
OPEN APP
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Start 14 Days Free Trial Subscribe Now
Follow Us On