'Contemptuous': Rajasthan High Court Expresses Displeasure Over Counsel Insisting Judge To Recuse From Hearing, Places Matter Before CJ

The Rajasthan High Court has opined that no counsel can insist a Judge to recuse from hearing a case, even if during the course of hearing, the court has commented on the merits of the case, which in the counsel's opinion are not favourable.The remarks were made by Justice Vijay Bishnoi after a counsel, appearing for the petitioner in the matter, insisted that the case be transferred to another Bench. The court opined that the conduct of the counsel, who sought the Judge's recusal and kept interrupting to prevent it from passing the order, is "highly objectionable and contemptuous". Without making any further comment regarding conduct of the petitioner's counsel and deeming it appropriate to place the matter before the Chief Justice for suitable orders, observed, "This Court is of the opinion that no counsel can insist the Court not to hear the matter on the ground that this Court is not able to take up the matter despite diligent of the fact that more than 100 cases are listed today and several advocates got their matters marked as urgent. Even if during the course of hearing, the Court has commented on the merits of the case, which as per the counsel for the petitioner is not in favour of the petitioner, then also no counsel can insist to recuse the Court from hearing the matter." Essentially, when court assembled, the petitioner's counsel Ms. Arti Kumari Gupta mentioned this matter and submitted that the same may be transferred to another Bench, since the court is not in a position to hear the matter. In furtherance, the court tried to convince her that the matter would be taken up at its own turn but she refused to hear and continued with her arguments. The petitioner's counsel insisted more than twice that this Court should not hear the matter and the matter may be transferred to another Bench. She also stated that on an earlier occasion, this Court made oral comments, which the counsel felt were against the merits of the case. The court noted that even during the course of dictation of this order, counsel for the petitioner was continuously interrupting and insisting the Court not to hear the matter and to pass any order in this matter. The petitioner's counsel also submitted that she was making these submissions in the interest of her client. Case Title: Master Arjun Choudhary Through His Father Mr. Bhanwar Lal v. Chairman, Army Public School, Jodhpur & Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 129 Click Here To Read/Download Order

'Contemptuous': Rajasthan High Court Expresses Displeasure Over Counsel Insisting Judge To Recuse From Hearing, Places Matter Before CJ

ANIRUDH VIJAY

Tags