New Delhi: A sitting district judge in Madhya Pradesh, whose name was cleared last month by the Supreme Court collegium for High Court judgeship, was considered for elevation two years ago as well.
However, his name was then not approved, but returned to the High Court in the wake of complaints that included one by a junior woman judge in MP, who had accused him of causing her mental harassment by discriminating against her on the basis of caste, ThePrint has learnt.
The woman judge, Aditi Gajendra Sharma, has now written to the top five judges of the Supreme Court, including Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, expressing concerns about the collegium’s move to recommend district judge Rajesh Kumar Gupta for a promotion to the HC. She has also written separately to the central government.
Sharma was terminated from service in 2023 for not faring well in the marking system meant to study the trial court judge’s performance, following which she had moved the Supreme Court challenging her dismissal, calling it arbitrary. She was reinstated following a top court verdict in February this year.
In her latest letter to the SC judges, Sharma has stated that in her petition challenging her dismissal, she had specifically mentioned the alleged harassment she faced by Gupta. Her petition, which ThePrint has accessed, narrated instances where Gupta and his wife allegedly publicly commented against her, “undermining her dignity as a woman and judicial officer”.
In February this year, when the top court ordered Sharma’s reinstatement, it did not make any observations on the allegations against Gupta.
Sources in the Supreme Court told ThePrint that Gupta’s name was forwarded by the MP HC collegium in 2023 as well. However, the collegium—led by the then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud—had returned his file to the HC chief justice, asking him to conduct an enquiry into the complaint made by the woman judge.
Meanwhile, another allegation surfaced against Gupta, which pertained to the alleged leak of a confidential court document at his behest. The enquiry with regard to this was entrusted to a Supreme Court judge who later exonerated the district judge, sources in the SC said.
The MP HC chief justice too gave a clean chit to Gupta and re-sent his name to the Supreme Court collegium this April for fresh consideration.
When ThePrint contacted Gupta, he declined to comment, saying that he was under the HC’s supervision and was not allowed to speak on the matter.
Also Read: As bar associations go after courtroom imposters in black & white, concerns about ‘overreach’
‘Mend your behaviour’
ThePrint has also learnt that the collegium members were unaware of Sharma’s litigation in the Supreme Court and the allegations she levelled against Gupta in her petition. Sources in the top court said this is a clear lapse on the part of the secretariat, which is tasked with preparing a complete file on candidates whose names are in the ambit of consideration for elevation to the HC.
ThePrint has also learnt that Sharma had made complaints against Gupta before her termination in 2023 and had written to the HC again after she was dismissed from service. This time, she sent a complaint to all HC judges and marked a copy to senior judges of the Supreme Court as well.
The complaint, it is learnt from individuals in the know, had documentary proof to support her allegations. When she was reinstated following the Supreme Court’s February verdict, she received an advisory from the administrative branch to mend “her behaviour” as a judicial officer. This prompted her to once again send a representation to the HC, requesting the court to consider it a formal complaint against Gupta.
Despite complaining multiple times, Sharma was given no hearing, nor called by the HC to vent her grievance. Her lawyer told ThePrint that the judge, in terms of principles of natural justice, should have been called to get her version when the SC collegium had sent back Gupta’s file to the HC.
‘No personal relationships with kids of high-ranking individuals’
Sharma’s petition in the Supreme Court made startling allegations about the abuse of authority by Gupta. She claimed that she had become the subject of his attention due to various personal and professional disparities.
According to the petition, Sharma, as a trainee judge, faced various difficulties and unwelcome behaviour from Gupta and his wife. They made derogatory statements about her personal and professional life, and did not appreciate her friendship with their daughter who was her batchmate. She was told by Gupta’s wife that she should “refrain” from displaying personal relationships with the children of higher-ranking individuals, the petition says.
It also recalled an alleged incident of 2019 when Gupta had asked her to arrange refreshments for a meeting and later rebuked her for not making proper arrangements, warning that she could lose her job if such negligence continues.
Sharma also claimed in her petition that Gupta used to make derogatory remarks about her in public gatherings. At one event, she alleged, he questioned her character in front of other judicial officers.
(Edited by Gitanjali Das)