Indian judiciary faces unprecedented events: Collegium decisions under spotlight

NEW DELHI: A tribunal judge has revealed that a senior judge of the higher judiciary tried to influence him in a case. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the appointment of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai’s relative as a judge of the Bombay High Court. In another decision, Justice B.V. Nagarathna dissented from the Collegium’s move to elevate Patna High Court Chief Justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi to the Supreme Court, overlooking seniority. Unprecedented incidents unfolded in the Indian judiciary on Tuesday.

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench, disclosed in an order that a judge from the higher judiciary had approached him, asking for a favourable order in a case. “I say this with great anguish, and I am recusing myself from hearing the matter,” he noted in his order.

However, Justice Sharma did not reveal the name of the judge who tried to influence the case or the party on whose behalf the call was made. The case has now been referred to the Tribunal's Chairperson, who will refer it to an appropriate bench. The matter involves a dispute between Attluru Srinivasulu Reddy, a director removed from KLSR Infratech Company, and A.S. Met Corporation. The order dated August 13 was made public only yesterday.

Collegium recommends CJI’s relative
On August 19, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended the name of Advocate Raj Damodar Wakode, a relative of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, for appointment as a judge of the Bombay High Court. His name was included along with 13 other lawyers. Reports suggest that the Chief Justice did not participate in that day’s Collegium meeting.

Nagarathna dissents on Pancholi’s elevation
On Monday, the Collegium decided to recommend Chief Justice Alok Aradhe of the Bombay High Court and Chief Justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi of the Patna High Court for elevation to the Supreme Court. Justice Pancholi, a native of Gujarat, is ranked 57th in the national seniority list. Justice B.V. Nagarathna dissented, objecting to his selection over more senior judges. She noted that Gujarat already has two judges in the Supreme Court and that priority should be given to states without any representation. However, other Collegium members—Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, and J.K. Maheshwari—supported Pancholi’s elevation.

Representation gaps remain
1. There are currently no judges in the Supreme Court from the High Courts of Jharkhand, Odisha, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand, Meghalaya, Sikkim and Tripura. From Kerala, only Justice K. Vinod Chandran is serving in the Supreme Court.

2. The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR), convened by senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, has expressed concern about transparency in the Supreme Court Collegium’s decisions.