SC Judge's Letters Allege Favouritism in Rajasthan HC; Questions CJI's Silence

Supreme Court Judge Justice Sandeep Mehta has written three letters to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant in August, raising serious concerns about the functioning of the Rajasthan High Court under Acting Chief Justice (ACJ) Sanjeev Prakash Sharma. The letters question why his repeated appeals for the transfer of Justice Sharma have been ignored despite what he describes as “clear evidence” of favouritism.

In his first letter dated August 2, Justice Mehta described a “grim and disturbing scenario” in his parent High Court. He stated that the Acting Chief Justice, who is due to retire on September 26, has shown a “total lack of leadership qualities” and exhibited conduct unbecoming of the head of the institution on multiple occasions.

Justice Mehta reminded the CJI that he had been making “fervent appeals” for the appointment of a regular Chief Justice to the Rajasthan High Court since the beginning of 2026. However, no positive response has been received so far. He alleged maladministration and malpractices on both the judicial and administrative sides of the High Court under Justice Sharma.

The Supreme Court judge said that cases were suddenly withdrawn and shifted to the Bench of the Acting Chief Justice without any justifiable cause. He noted that he was initially asked by the CJI to provide a list of such cases in writing, but was later assured that no written submission was needed and suitable action would be taken. In a subsequent letter dated August 10, Justice Mehta mentioned that the CJI had asked Justice Sharma to respond to the allegations, but no specific information on the reply or the facts of the cases was available.

Justice Mehta further alleged that judicial officers were called and humiliated to satisfy the “personal vendetta” of the ACJ. He also pointed out that a full court meeting was held on a working day to designate a “large number of favoured advocates as seniors.” Additionally, he criticised a plan for a multi-storied guest house with almost 100 rooms for the High Court, calling it a “sheer waste of public money.”

The letters also mention complaints from anguished judges of the High Court who said they were “frequently threatened” with retributive action, including transfer, by the ACJ, who allegedly claimed “closeness” with the CJI. Justice Mehta referred to the CJI’s Bench’s recent observation about judges passing orders for extraneous considerations in the twilight of their careers, describing such actions as attempts to “hit sixes” before retirement.

“It is indeed ironical that on one hand, the Chief Justice of India is flagging corrupt practices by judges in the eve of their careers, and here we have an ACJ indulging in these very activities with impunity,” one of the letters said.

In his final letter on August 17, Justice Mehta used terms like “rampant nepotism and favouritism” against the ACJ. He expressed bewilderment over why “such a long rope” was given to a judge whose request for repatriation to the Rajasthan High Court was not accepted by the Supreme Court Collegium in March 2023. Justice Sharma, who served in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, was eventually recommended for repatriation on May 26, 2025. He was appointed Acting Chief Justice of Rajasthan in September last year and has held the post for over ten months.

Justice Mehta has repeatedly requested the CJI to appoint a Chief Justice from another State to the Rajasthan High Court to prevent the situation from worsening. “Continued ignorance of the request, in my opinion, is wholly against the interest of the institution,” he wrote.

At one point, the apex court judge even considered whether placing his letters in the public domain might trigger an “inflow of information.” The CJI’s office has not yet issued any public response to the allegations.