New Delhi: A heated exchange between the bar and the bench in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta, has prompted a formal representation to the Chief Justice and revived scrutiny over earlier controversies linked to the judge.
New Delhi-based advocate Rishikesh Kumar, who saw the drama unfold Monday in courtroom 10 while waiting for his case to be called, made a representation before Madhya Pradesh High Court Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and emailed the Court’s Registrar General detailing what unfolded in his presence.
The advocate told ThePrint that he is awaiting a response from the court staff and is willing to provide a physical eye-witness account before the High Court, if required.
On Monday itself, the advocate made a long post on ‘X’ in which he mentioned that “in 16 years of legal practice, I witnessed something unprecedented.”
“This incident occurred at the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta. The loss of judicial composure and the use of such language are deeply disturbing, as they are unbecoming of a constitutional court and inconsistent with the dignity and restraint expected of a judge of such stature,” he posted.
Kumar gave an eye-witness account to ThePrint and said what transpired was “not just unparliamentary but also unheard of”, emphasising that a constitutional post such as that of a High Court judge holds significant importance.
According to him, while another matter was being heard and a lawyer was appearing through video-conferencing explaining a case, the live-streaming was switched off. Thereafter, the judge allegedly used “highly derogatory and unparliamentary language from the Bench”.
ThePrint reached the High Court registrar through email for its reaction on the episode that allegedly took place Monday. This report will be updated as and when a response is received.
Corroborating Kumar’s account, another advocate present on the premises, described to ThePrint how the exchange escalated. The judge, this advocate said, appeared to be triggered, possibly by the tone or arguments advanced by the lawyer appearing through video-conferencing.
According to this advocate, the judge began shouting while standing on the bench and allegedly warned the lawyer, ‘main chhoroonga nahi, isne pehle bhi aisa kiya hai, main gunda hoon (I won’t leave, he’s done this before, I’m a ruffian)’. After some time, the court staff attempted to calm him down, and members of the Bar intervened to speak with him.
The eye-witnesses told ThePrint that “apparently, the lawyer, appearing on video conferencing, came down to the court to talk to the judge” and that with the assistance of Bar members, the issue was eventually “softened”.
They emphasised that even if there are differences between a lawyer and a judge, there are other ways of dealing with such a situation, and that “a high court judge showing such vocabulary publicly is unbecoming”.
Justice Gupta has been in the news twice last year. In July 2025, a woman civil judge publicly resigned in protest after he was elevated to the High Court for two years.
She wrote to the top five judges of the Supreme Court, including then Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai, expressing concerns about the collegium’s recommendation to promote Justice Gupta, a district judge then, to the High Court. She also wrote separately to the central government.
The civil judge had been terminated from service in 2023 after not faring well in the marking system meant to evaluate performances of trial court judges. She subsequently approached the Supreme Court challenging her dismissal as arbitrary. In February last year, the top court reinstated her.
In her letter, she stated that in her petition challenging her dismissal, she had specifically mentioned the alleged harassment she faced by Gupta. Her petition narrated instances where Justice Gupta and his wife allegedly publicly commented against her, “undermining her dignity as a woman and judicial officer”.
ThePrint had reported the details of the letter she wrote to the SC judges.
Sources in the Supreme Court had then told ThePrint that Justice Gupta’s name was forwarded by the Madhya Pradesh High Court collegium in 2023. However, the collegium led by then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud returned his file to the High Court Chief Justice, asking for an enquiry into the complaint made by the woman judge.
That month, another allegation surfaced against Justice Gupta pertaining to the alleged leak of a confidential court document at his behest. An inquiry into the matter was entrusted to a Supreme Court judge, who later exonerated the district judge, the sources told ThePrint.
In September 2025, the HC judge again hit headlines when the Madhya Pradesh High Court expressed strong reservations against his “disparaging” remarks against a trial court judge.
A bench led by Justice Atul Sreedharan said it was “compelled” to take suo motu cognizance of a 12 September order delivered by Justice Gupta in which he suggested disciplinary action against Shivpuri’s first additional sessions judge (ASJ).
The HC bench observed that Justice Gupta’s order was excessive and had been passed without jurisdiction. It noted that the judge’s comments on the merits of the ASJ order were uncalled for and excessive because they were made in an unrelated proceeding.
It further observed that such remarks were in direct violation of the Supreme Court decisions that have repeatedly cautioned against passing adverse observations against trial court judges that have the propensity to besmirch district courts.
(Edited by Tony Rai)