NEW DELHI: Supreme Court docket Decide Sandeep Mehta has written one other letter to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant alleging that Rajasthan excessive courtroom choose Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, who was changed because the Performing Chief Justice of Rajasthan excessive courtroom, was interfering in an inside judicial enquiry by abusing administrative powers.That is the fourth letter written by Justice Mehta to CJI on the conduct of the Rajasthan HC choose. His earlier three letters on Aug 2, 10 and 17 had accused Justice Sharma, the then Performing Chief Justice of Rajasthan HC, of “maladministration”, “malpractices”, “nepotism” and “favouritism”. The letter triggered protest from a lawyer in HC and noticed the Supreme Court docket collegium recommending Justice Sanjay Ok Agrawal’s title as Chief Justice of Rajasthan excessive courtroom, which was accepted by the central govt.Justice Mehta had pleaded for the switch of Justice Sharma, who’s retiring on Sept 26, and appointment of an everyday chief justice. Justice Mehta additionally complained as to why CJI Surya Kant had not acted on his fervent pleas.In his fourth letter, Justice Mehta stated that he has “additional info” and “materials” relating to arbitrary, doubtful and patently “high-handed” acts of Justice Sharma.
Share your ideas within the feedback
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
Referring to a criticism committee of excessive courtroom which was constituted to investigate into allegations in opposition to a judicial officer accused of displaying indecent photos of a fellow girl officer on his cell phone, Justice Mehta stated, “Two Resolutions of the committee dated Might 21, 2026, and July 9, 2026, clearly document that the Performing Chief Justice (Justice Sharma) has made direct intervention within the enquiry proceedings, hampering the independence of the committee and that such intervention might vitiate the enquiry as a complete and likewise breached the confidentiality of such delicate proceedings.”“The committee additionally noticed that the Performing Chief Justice induced data of the committee to be shared with different officers of the registry and judicial officers, thereby breaching the confidentiality of the enquiry instituted in opposition to a judicial officer with grave prices,” he claimed.
