Supreme Court Transfers Two Special Judges Handling Coal Scam Cases on Delhi HC's Request

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has transferred two special judges who were hearing coal scam cases in Delhi, acting on a request from the Delhi High Court that said the judicial officers were better suited for other responsibilities. The transfer comes barely six months after one of the judges took charge.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Suryakant and Justices Joymala Bagchi and V Mohana recorded the High Court's request on Thursday. The Delhi High Court had sought the transfer of Special Judges Sunena Sharma and Dheeraj Mor to assign them different duties.

Judge Sharma had assumed charge in January, after the Supreme Court approved the Delhi High Court's previous request to relieve then-incumbent Sanjay Bansal, who had presided over the special coal scam court for nearly four-and-a-half years. Judge Mor was appointed as special judge in April 2025. At the time of the latest request, Judge Sharma had served barely six months, while Judge Mor had completed just over a year in the post.

The Supreme Court noted that it had received a letter from the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court stating that both judges were “better suited for certain other responsibilities.” The High Court also described them as officers of “outstanding merit” and said it wished to utilise their services elsewhere.

Accepting the request, the Supreme Court allowed the Delhi High Court to transfer the two judges from their posts as special judges hearing CBI coal scam cases. The Court also approved the appointment of two replacements: Virender Kumar Kharta, earlier a special judge of the NDPS court at Saket, and Ajay Garg, previously an additional sessions judge at a fast-track court in Tis Hazari. Kharta will take over from Sharma, while Garg will replace Mor.

On Friday, the Delhi High Court issued the consequential transfer and posting orders. Notably, neither Sharma nor Mor has been assigned a fresh judicial posting. According to the notification, both have been attached to the office of the Principal District and Sessions Judge (CBI).

The High Court directed both officers to notify all matters in which judgments or orders had been reserved before relinquishing charge, and to pronounce them on the scheduled date or, at the latest, within two to three weeks despite the transfer. The dates fixed for pronouncement must also be reflected in the cause lists of both the previous and new courts, as well as on the court's website.

The coal scam cases, which relate to alleged irregularities in the allocation of coal blocks, have been pending in special courts for several years. Last year, 29 CBI corruption cases were pending before the two special coal scam courts, while more than 27 had already been disposed of.

The Supreme Court's order does not specify the nature of the “other responsibilities” for which the two judges were sought. Such transfers are typically made to address administrative requirements or to match judges' expertise with specific assignments.