The Supreme Court on Thursday came down heavily on a petitioner who sought an investigation into Karnataka High Court judge Justice M Nagaprasanna's decision to recuse from three matters [Chandraprabha and ors v Union of India and Anr].

A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih expressed its displeasure over the plea, which they found not only inappropriate but also capable of sending “wrong signals”.

"Look at your prayers. How can prayer B be pressed? What is this? This will send wrong signals. Guidelines is fine but you can't seek a relief directing probe in under what circumstances judge recused, it will show some other motive is there. You want to press?...This goes to your bona fides. You should seek relief only on principles. What was the need for putting allegations against all private parties and casting aspersions against the judges? Manner of filing this petition highly objectionable," the Court said.

The petition filed through Advocate Vishal Arun Mishra sought guidelines governing the recusal of judges and a probe into the recusal of Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court in a batch of three petitions.

In one of these, the judge had alleged recused after reserving orders in the matter, which sought the registration of criminal complaints against the wife and son of the present Karnataka State Lokayukta. This petition had also sought a court-monitored probe into the corruption allegations.

During today's hearing, the Supreme Court observed that the plea against Justice Nagaprasanna's recusal was filed in an "oblique manner" and questioned the motivations behind it.

"Are the judges also so weak according to you? Lokayukta can influence judicial outcomes? Writ has been filed in oblique manner, we are not sure of motivations. If judges stay up till 7 PM, you are not bothered about it," Justice Oka said.

Justice Amanullah added that the Court was not prima facie satisfied with the grounds in the plea and said that it could not probe the discretion of the High Court judge.

"Entire Karnataka judiciary will be ... Is it feasible? We are prima facie not satisfied. You may have some high grounds. We cannot probe the discretion of the judge," he said.

Eventually, the Court allowed the withdrawal of the plea but made it clear that the petition contained several objectionable points. It further clarified that it had not adjudicated on whether it would be appropriate to lay down any guidelines for recusal.

[Read our coverage of the hearing]