TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1034X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therewith a copy of this order so as to enable the Tribunal to act accordingly. - Income Tax Appeal No. 584 OF 2014 With Criminal Writ Petition No. 1590 OF 2017, IPA NO. 147 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 6-9-2017 - MR. S.C. DHARMADHIKARI AND MR. PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Charanjeet Chanderpal with Ms. Namita Shirke For The Respondent : Mr. M.H. Patel ORDER P.C. : 1 When this Income Tax Appeal as also the Criminal Writ Petition was on our Board on 4th September, 2017, and on prior dates, the respondent party-in-person raised a specific objection. That objection is as follows. 2 He submits that he has no faith in the impartiality or integrity of one of us (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.) and he has specifically requested the Hon'ble The Chief Justice to assign this matter to a Bench, other than the one presided over by Justice S.C. Dharmadhikari. He would, therefore, submit that this written objection being on record, at least one of us should recuse himself from hearing the cases any further. 3 We have perused the written note put on record by the respondent appearing in person. We have very sympathetically and patiently heard him even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yer, was made by Mr. R.K. Anand, an eminent Senior Advocate, before the High Court of Delhi, seeking the recusal of Mr. Justice Manmohan Sarin from hearing his personal case. Mr. Justice Manmohan Sarin while declining the request made by Mr. R.K. Anand, observed as under: The path of recusal is very often a convenient and a soft option. This is especially so since a Judge really has no vested interest in doing a particular matter. However, the oath of office taken under Article 219 of the Constitution of India enjoins the Judge to duly and faithfully and to the best of his knowledge and judgment, perform the duties of office without fear or favour, affection or ill will while upholding the constitution and the laws. In a case, where unfounded and motivated allegations of bias are sought to be made with a view of forum hunting / Bench preference or brow-beating the Court, then, succumbing to such a pressure would tantamount to not fulfilling the oath of office. The above determination of the High Court of Delhi was assailed before this Court in R.K. Anand v. Delhi High Court, (2009) 8 SCC 106 : 2009 AIR SCW 6876). The determination of the High Court whereby Mr. Just ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 31.8.2012, would require prolonged hearing of the matter. Months of time, just in the same manner as we had taken while passing the order dated 31.8.2012, would have to be spent again. Possibly the submissions made by the learned counsel seeking our recusal, was consciously aimed at the above objective. Was this the reason for the theatrics, of some of the learned Senior Counsel? Difficult to say for sure. But deep within, don t we all understand? It was also for the sake of saving precious time of this Court, that we decided to bear the brunt and the rhetoric, of some of the learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner. We are therefore satisfied, that it would not be better, for another Bench to hear this case. II Must judicial orders be obeyed at all costs? Can a judicial order be disregarded, if the person concerned feels, that the order is wholly illegal and void? 4 The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has clarified that when a Judge takes oath of office and in terms, prescribed by the constitution, implicit in that is there is no ill will, much less any enmity and when a Judge is supposed to decide a case impartially, he has to be strict. Suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rties. The submission shocks my conscience, particularly when it suddenly came from a regular practitioner from this Court, who was being looked at as an experienced and responsible officer of the Court. The entire arguments in this matter went on smoothly, patiently and with interest. After conclusion of the arguments, both the learned counsel were asked as to whether they intend to make any additional submissions, and thereafter the dictation commenced as per the usual practice. I need not delve upon any further and I refrain from making any comments against Shri. V. V. Bhangde. However, the increasing trend need to be commented upon; so as to caution the lawyers and the litigants about the consequences of it, which can be avoided. 15. A lawyer has his own choice of appearing before the Court presided over by a particular Judge to conduct the matter. If his matter is listed before the Court where he does not want to appear, he is at liberty return such matter and/or fees to his client and can ask him to engage some other lawyer or he may refuse to accept the matter if he has not already filed his vakalatnama. A judge may also recuse himself from taking up the matters of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unless justified, must never be acceded to. This is what the Apex Court has held recently in NJAC case instituted by the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association and Another v. Union of India, reported in 2015 (11) SCALE 1 : (2015 AIR SCW 5457). The question of recusal is normally decided by a Judge on the basis of his personal or private interest in the subject-matter of the litigation, his intimacy with the party/parties to a lis before him, his perception about conflict of interest in taking up the matter, and his own conscience. Such decision does not depend upon the dictates of lawyers or litigants. ... 18. Recusal to take the matters to be conducted by some lawyers, is a matter of Judge's own choosing and it cannot be at the dictates of the lawyers. What a Judge has to see is that he performs his duty of deciding the matters before him without fear or favour, affection or ill will. He has to keep in mind the principle that the justice should not only be done, but it must appear to have been done. The decision of recusal to take the matters of lawyers, depends upon the Judge's personal relations or intimacy with such lawyers, and his own conscience to dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erse order or anything contrary to their interest. It is that perception which is entertained by the litigants and that is how for a favourable verdict, they resort to every tactic in the book or even impermissible in law or unknown to fairness, equity and justice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has referred to them extensively in the foregoing paragraphs which we have reproduced from the judgment. 9 In such circumstances we do not think that the litigant who is appearing in person before us can be given an opportunity to dictate to the Court and to any judicial officer as to who should be the Judge / presiding Judge to whom his cases should be assigned and who should preside over any Division Bench. It is the prerogative of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice and it is he/she who decides how the judicial work should be assigned. Once the Chief Justice assigns judicial work to a Bench, then, it is not unless there is a power exercised otherwise, open to a litigant to call upon the Judges to recuse themselves from judicial work in this manner. 10 Pertinently, the respondent party-in-person has not stated anything by which one can conclude that there is a reasonable apprehension o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erstand his plight for multiple proceedings are instituted and in the highest court of the State against him. Sometimes, oblivious of the powers of the court, faced with intricacies and issues of law and interpretation of legal provisions, out of sheer desperation and frustration, parties make allegations. So long as the court does not exhibit any extreme feelings nor treats the litigants disdainfully by refusing to them a fair reasonable opportunity of hearing, we do not see any reason for them to complain. It is not the court which drags them into legal proceedings nor summons them to answer any allegation or charge merely to derive some pleasure. The embarrassment and harassment faced by litigants allegedly is not, as in this case, because of any act of the court. It is the respondent who raised a jurisdictional issue before the Tribunal and, therefore, the Tribunal felt it was its bounden duty to deal with all contentions. Hence none of the judgments relied upon by the respondent have any application to the grievance before us. 13 We have heard Mr. Chanderpal appearing in support of this Appeal preferred by the Revenue. We have also perused the order under challenge. 14 T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
