World

Supreme Court Judge Seeks Removal of Rajasthan High Court Acting Chief Justice

Justice Sandeep Mehta has raised serious allegations against Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, prompting a review by the Chief Justice of India.

27 August 2026Tagblick Newsdesk

AI-generatedWritten by an AI system, editorially responsible — how we work

Archive photo: Supreme Court Judge Seeks Removal of Rajasthan High Court Acting Chief Justice — Archive photoPhoto: detsang · Flickr · BY

Justice Sandeep Mehta of the Supreme Court has called for the removal of Rajasthan High Court's Acting Chief Justice, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma. He has accused Justice Sharma of misusing his powers and manipulative practices concerning case listings.

In his formal complaint, Justice Mehta claimed that Justice Sharma has demonstrated a lack of leadership qualities and cited issues of maladministration and malpractice within both judicial and administrative functions of the High Court. The allegations have raised concerns about the management of court operations in Rajasthan.

Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant acknowledged the allegations in a press statement and assured that the matter is under examination. CJI Kant emphasized that the process will consider the evidence presented by Justice Mehta along with Justice Sharma's response.

CJI Kant, addressing the media, stated that allegations should not be mistaken for findings, reinforcing that any resolution would follow established protocols. He reiterated that the Supreme Court would not engage in resolving individual complaints through public discourse.

Justice Mehta, who has roots in the Rajasthan High Court, has urged for the urgent transfer of Justice Sharma and proposed the appointment of a chief justice from another state to oversee the High Court in the interim. This request underscores the seriousness of the concerns raised.

The situation has drawn significant attention, and CJI Kant has expressed that the matter will be resolved appropriately without undue influence from media narratives. However, the timeframe for any potential decisions regarding Justice Sharma remains unclear.

This item was written by an AI system on the basis of the headlines and short teasers of the independently operating newsrooms named below. We disclose this under Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). Before publication we check origin and verifiability — anything that appears in only one place is not published — as well as language, substance and legally sensitive content. No separate substantive review of each individual item by a natural person takes place; we therefore do not rely on the exemption in Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of the AI Act. Editorial responsibility for this publication rests with the person named in the imprint (§ 18 Abs. 2 MStV). Please report errors to [email protected] — we will correct or remove the item. Full reports are available from the sources listed.