In a first, both judges of a bench in SC recuse

 In a first, both judges of a bench in SC recuse

---

Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com

11.01.2022

New Delhi: Fearing invectives, both judges on a Supreme Court bench — Justices D Y Chandrachud and A S Bopanna — created a record of sort by recusing from hearing the Krishna case just because they hailed from Maharashtra and in the case apart from Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

Though the judges take oath to render justice without “fear or favour”, apprehensions over insulting or abusive criticism forced their recusal from the Krishna water dispute case.

“We do not want to be targets of invectives,” Justice Chandrachud of the Supreme Court said after consulting Justice Bopanview that similarly placed judges had recused from hearing the sensitive river water disputes case.

SC judges recuse from river dispute hearing fearing public backlash  hat may be one of the reasons for recusal to avoid getting accused of parent state bias while hearing the case as the judges hailed from Maharashtra and Kar nataka, respectively. But, the real and immediate reason behind the recusal was something else. A few days before the scheduled hearing, the two judges were inundated with emails, which a judge described to TOI as “horrible”, and letters accusing them of bias given the fact that they belonged to states which were in litigation over their share in Krishna waters.

Upset with the tone and tenor of the emails and letters, the judges decided not to proceed with the hearing of the dispute fearing a severe public backlash later whatever be the merits of their verdict. Justice Chandrachud is from Maharashtra and Justice Bopanna from Karnataka.

Both Justice Chandrachud and Justice Bopanna on a daily basis hear cases that have roots in their parent states. But, in India, the river water disputes evoke high emotions, which often run high to breach the legal embankments to become a Kilkenny cat fight, both inside and outside the courtrooms. Krishna river water dispute has a checkered history for the last 14 years.

Telangana accuses Karnataka of using more than its share and diverting water to various projects. Karnataka on the other handsays that instead of water getting wasted by draining into the sea, it is better to harness it for use in irrigation and replenishing dry regions. In November 16, 2011, the SC had restrained Centre from publishing the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal Award dividing the water between Karnataka, erstwhile Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra.

Full report on www.toi.in