Former CJI BR Gavai revealed that a retired High Court Chief Justice attempted to sway an NCLAT judge’s decision in favor of a corporate party. The disclosure raises urgent questions about judicial accountability and ethics in India.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a shocking revelation, former Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai disclosed that a Chief Justice of a High Court attempted to influence a judicial member of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai, to secure a favorable decision for a corporate entity.
The disclosure has triggered renewed discussions about judicial accountability and ethics in India’s judiciary.
What Happened: CJI BR Gavai
CJI Gavai, who retired recently, revealed that Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma of NCLAT reported an unusual incident on August 13, stating that a senior and highly respected member of the higher judiciary had approached him to seek a favorable judgment for a particular party.
Following this, Justice Sharma recused himself from the case to maintain impartiality. However, by the time the matter was formally reported to the CJI, the concerned High Court Chief Justice had already retired, preventing any internal investigation under existing judicial rules.
CJI Gavai added that he and his colleagues had been discussing new protocols to address such incidents in the future, but he opted to defer action to his successor, CJI Surya Kant, who now holds the responsibility of deciding on further measures.
Accountability for Retired High Court Chief Justices
While retired High Court Chief Justices are technically outside the scope of internal judicial investigations, they are not completely beyond accountability. Possible actions include:
- CJI recommending impeachment in Parliament if misconduct is established.
- Initiating a criminal investigation, including filing an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act, through the current CJI.
The issue came to broader attention on November 14, when a Supreme Court bench led by Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi heard arguments from lawyer Prashant Bhushan, representing one of the petitioners. The bench emphasized that interference in judicial proceedings must be addressed at the highest levels to preserve the integrity of the judiciary.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on NCLAT
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma of NCLAT