๐๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ญ๐ข๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ซ ๐๐๐ญ๐ญ๐๐ซ ๐๐ฌ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐๐ฌ ๐๐ก๐จ๐ฐ-๐๐๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ ๐๐จ๐ญ๐ข๐๐๐ฌ ๐จ๐ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ญ๐๐ฆ๐ฉ๐ญ ๐ญ๐จ ๐๐, ๐ ๐๐, ๐๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐๐๐๐:
In the Audio-leak case, IB, FIA, PTA and PEMRA filed applications before the Court, seeking recusal of the presiding judge from hearing the case. They collectively alleged in their applications that the presiding judge is one of the signatories of the six judges letter to the Supreme Judicial Council. He is biased with the intelligence agencies. He has also worked and advised the telecom industries. Thus, he should decline hearing the case in hand.
The Court has not only dismissed the applications being vexatious and frivolous, but has also issued notices to the applicants to show why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against them. The Court deemed these applications tantamount to impeding and obstructing the process of the Court. The Court has also fined the applicants up to five hundred thousand rupees each which will be recovered from the salaries of the officers who authorised filling these applications.
The order is well-reasoned and well-grounded. Worth a read order indeed. It discusses the concept of recusal of a judge on different grounds and how it can be invoked. It says that primarily there are two grounds on which the judge should recuse himself from hearing a case: one, his personal interest is involved in the case; second, he is biased towards one of the parties. The order further discusses the concept of bias and personal interest in full details which are worth a read.
Ojbection_case_No._8497_of_2023_638504424318830935