TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (10) TMI 333
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 555 of 2003 whereby the High Court has dismissed the revision petition preferred by the appellant against the Judgment and Order dated 22-3-2003 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 104 of 2001. 2. Since we intend to remand the matter to the High Court for fresh disposal, it is not necessary to go into the factual matrix. Suffice to state that the appellant had filed a complaint against the respondents dated 24-11-1988 which was registered as FIR No. 393 of 1988 at P.S.- Srinivaspuri, New Delhi. Subsequently, the charges were framed against the respondents under Sections 498-A, 304-B read with Section 34 and Section 302 of the IPC by Shri Prithvi Raj, learned Additional District & Sessions Judge dated 15....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owing to inadvertence regarding his earlier recusal, has dismissed the revision petition by the impugned Judgment. In our opinion, the impugned Judgment, passed by Shri Justice S.N. Dhingra subsequent to his recusal at trial stage for personal reasons, is against the principle of natural justice and fair trial. 5. It is well settled law that a person who tries a cause should be able to deal with the matter placed before him objectively, fairly and impartially. No one can act in a judicial capacity if his previous conduct gives ground for believing that he cannot act with an open mind or impartially. The broad principle evolved by this Court is that a person, trying a cause, must not only act fairly but must be able to act above susp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y course of human conduct." 7. In the case of S. Parthasarthi v. State of A.P., (1974) 3 SCC 459, this Court has applied the "real likelihood" test and restored the decree of the trial court which invalidated compulsory retirement of the appellant by way of punishment. This Court observed : "16. .......We think that the reviewing authority must make a determination on the basis of the whole evidence before it, whether a reasonable man would in the circumstances infer that there is real likelihood of bias. The court must look at the impression which other people have. This follows from the principle that justice must not only be done but seen to be done. If right-minded persons would think that there is real likelihood of bia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and whether Respondent 4 was likely to be disposed to decide the matter only in a particular way. 16. It is the essence of a judgment that it is made after due observance of the judicial process; that the court or tribunal passing it observes, at least the minimal requirements of natural justice; is composed of impartial persons acting fairly and without bias and in good faith. A judgment which is the result of bias or want of impartiality is a nullity and the trial 'coram non judice'. 17. As to the tests of the likelihood of bias what is relevant is the reasonableness of the apprehension in that regard in the mind of the party. The proper approach for the Judge is not to look at his own mind and ask himself, however, honest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... including R. v. Sussex JJ, ex p McCarthy (supra) held : "In the judgment of this Court the right test is that prescribed by Blackburn, J., namely, that to disqualify a person from acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity upon the ground of interest (other than pecuniary or proprietary) in the subject-matter of the proceeding, a real likelihood of bias must be shown. This Court is further of opinion that a real likelihood of bias must be made to appear not only from the materials in fact ascertained by the party complaining, but from such further facts as he might readily have ascertained and easily verified in the course of his inquiries." 12. In the case of R. v. Gough, (1993) 2 All ER 724 (HL), the House of Lords while ....