Supreme Court judge seeks removal of Rajasthan High Court acting CJ

Indian Opinion DeskIndian Opinion DeskGovernance50 minutes ago1 Views

Supreme Court judge Justice Sandeep Mehta has written three letters to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant alleging that Rajasthan High Court Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma misused his office, manipulated…

Supreme Court judge Justice Sandeep Mehta has written three letters to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant alleging that Rajasthan High Court Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma misused his office, manipulated case listings and threatened colleagues. Justice Mehta has sought the immediate appointment of a chief justice from another high court, saying Justice Sharma's conduct raised "doubts on his integrity" and reflected a "totally anti-institutional approach."

Supreme Court judge seeks removal of Rajasthan High Court acting CJ

Justice Mehta’s letters, dated August 2, 10 and 17, cite complaints from fellow judges and an advocate. One instance involves a batch of appeals over land in Udaipur listed before Justice Sharma’s own bench despite a prior judgment barring such listing. Another complaint alleges he used his position to secure Lok Adalat appointments for people close to him, including a childhood friend and spouses of district judges. A serving Rajasthan High Court judge is said to have complained of vindictive conduct by Justice Sharma towards his wife, a senior district judiciary officer. Justice Mehta also flagged that Justice Sharma has held the acting chief justice post for more than ten months despite the collegium having earlier declined his repatriation to the Rajasthan High Court in March 2023. The collegium permitted his return in May 2025, and he became acting chief justice. Justice Mehta has urged the collegium to transfer Justice Sharma out of Rajasthan immediately.

Indian Opinion Analysis

Both outlets report the same facts from Justice Mehta's letters, with no editorial slant. LiveLaw leads with the integrity doubt and the CJI inaction, while Bar & Bench foregrounds the misuse-of-office framing and the retirement eve context. Neither omits or overstates, and neither adopts a pro-government or critical stance. This is uniform straight reporting. The implication is that the collegium's next move will test the institutional protocols for handling allegations from within the Supreme Court against an acting chief justice.

Coverage: 2 sources, 2 neutral


Sources (2): livelaw.in (neutral report), barandbench.com (neutral report)

This brief was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry.

Ask their opinion on this story
They have read this article, our coverage, and the web.
AI simulations of historical figures. Responses are generated from the historical record, not authentic statements.

0 Votes: 0 Upvotes, 0 Downvotes (0 Points)

Share your opinion

Loading Next Post...
Search Trending
Ask their opinion
Loading

Signing-in 3 seconds...

Signing-up 3 seconds...

All fields are required.