Recusal plea no tool for ‘bench hunting’, ‘forum shopping’: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that recusal pleas cannot be used as a means of "forum shopping" or "bench hunting." The court emphasized that personal differences between a lawyer and judge are insufficient grounds to request a judge's recusal. It dismissed an advocate's application seeking such recusal and a transfer of the case to another bench.

The court stated that allowing parties to choose their preferred judge would undermine judicial independence and public confidence in the justice system. Justice Ravi Cheemalapati, who was hearing the matter, noted that personal conflicts between a lawyer and judge alone cannot justify recusal. The advocate claimed a personal enmity with the presiding judge and had previously lodged complaints with the advocate-general and the Chief Justice.

However, the court dismissed these allegations as unsupported by the deponent's sworn affidavit. The court also cited a Supreme Court judgment, emphasizing that a litigant cannot choose the judge solely because they had a previous disagreement with the judge's decision. The court clarified that genuine conflicts of interest may warrant recusal, but personal animosity or disfavor is not a valid legal ground.

The court warned that forcing a judge to recuse through false allegations or intimidation is considered a form of "forum shopping" and could be viewed as a violation of the advocate's duty to uphold the dignity of the court. The application was ultimately dismissed as "misconceived and devoid of merit."