Judicial discipline vital, says ex-CJI Gavai on Rajasthan HC controversy

Former CJI BR Gavai said serious complaints against judges must be examined on facts, amid the controversy involving Justice Sandeep Mehta and Rajasthan HC.

Updated on: Sep 6, 2026, 10:28:39 IST

Prefer HTon Google

Share via
Copy link

Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai on Saturday said judicial discipline was important and serious complaints against judges should be examined and acted upon based on facts, while commenting on the controversy involving Supreme Court Justice Sandeep Mehta and Rajasthan High Court Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma.

After delivering the Yashraj Samant Memorial Annual Arbitration Lecture at the Rajasthan International Centre in Jaipur, Justice Gavai said he was surprised when he first read about the controversy in newspapers.

Declining to comment on the merits of the matter as it concerned the judiciary, Justice Gavai said Justice Mehta was his friend and had worked with him as a junior judge. “He played an important role in several cases related to orans. I was shocked to learn that he had written such a letter. When I asked him why he had done so, he said, ‘The Rajasthan High Court is like a mother to me. How can I remain silent if my mother is being mistreated?’ I have run out of patience’,” he added.

Justice Gavai said he subsequently spoke to some of his friends in the Rajasthan High Court to understand the situation and the conversations changed his initial perception that Justice Mehta had acted improperly. “What I heard about the situation in the Rajasthan High Court was really shocking,” he said.

Recalling an incident during his tenure in the Supreme Court, Justice Gavai said a complaint against a High Court judge had come before the collegium when Justice Sanjiv Khanna was the Chief Justice of India (CJI). Justice Khanna convened a collegium meeting the same day, the allegations were examined and the judge was transferred based on the facts, he said.

Justice Gavai said no uniform policy could govern every such complaint and decisions must be taken according to the facts and circumstances of each case. Although such matters should ordinarily remain confidential, he questioned what options remained when alleged irregularities became widespread.

The controversy started after Justice Mehta reportedly wrote three letters—dated August 2, 10 and 17—to the then Chief Justice of India, seeking action against Justice Sharma.

In the letters, Justice Mehta reportedly raised concerns over the Rajasthan High Court’s administrative functioning and accused the acting Chief Justice of misusing his authority. He also allegedly claimed that Justice Sharma had threatened fellow judges with transfers and asserted his proximity to the Chief Justice of India.

Justice Mehta sought the early appointment of a permanent Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, arguing that continued delay was harming the institution.

Justice Sharma rejected the allegations as false, baseless and motivated by personal grievances. He reportedly submitted a written response, supported by facts and other material, to the Chief Justice of India.

See Less