A very interesting debate. Members have expressed opinion on both sides. I support the recusal of Judges for the following reasons:
1. Justice should not only be done but should also appear to have been done. A person cannot be a judge of his own case. Therefore if he is even remotely interested in a party and even if by merits of the case such party succeeds in the case, freedom of speech and expression is generously used and all kinds of stories are floated against such Judge. This can only be avoided by the Judge by recusing from the case.
2. Media has become omnipresent these days and even an innocent question posed by a Judge to the Counsel or a mild friendly censure to the counsel like – “why cant you come prepared thoroughly in the case” can be seen reported in media and at times blown beyond proportion. Another tendency which I have observed is there is a section of litigants and counsel selectively posting information in the media and the rest of the media debating on such issues. Judges being human beings with likes, dislikes, sensitivity may like to avoid public debate on the questions posed by them (sometimes misinterpreting their questions ) This might have contributed largely to the recusal of cases by judges.
In such eventuality what has to be ensured by the Honourable Chief Justice of the concerned court or the Honourable Chief Justice of India in listing the matter immediately before another bench and ensure that the precious time of the litigants is not lost. Ideally such case should be posted before another bench at the same place in the cause list or immediately after lunch if the matter is originally listed at the top of the list, which would have otherwise reached before the original bench before lunch.
