🏛️ NCLAT Judge Recuses Himself Amid Alleged Pressure from Senior Judiciary Member
In a significant development, Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Chennai Bench has recused himself from hearing an insolvency case, citing external pressure from a senior member of the judiciary. This marks the third instance where Justice Sharma has stepped aside due to alleged attempts to influence his judicial conduct.
📌 Background of the Case
The matter pertains to an appeal challenging the admission of a Hyderabad-based company into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The case was nearing its final stages when Justice Sharma disclosed that he had been approached by "one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary" seeking a favorable order for a particular party. In his order dated August 13, 2025, Justice Sharma stated:
“I am anguished to observe that I have been approached by one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary of this country for seeking an order in favor of a particular party. Hence, I recuse to hear the matter.” LawChakra+1
Following this disclosure, the bench directed that the case file be placed before the NCLAT Chairperson for reallocation to another bench.
🔄 Previous Instances of Recusal
This is not the first time Justice Sharma has recused himself due to alleged external influence:
November 2024: Justice Sharma stepped aside from a case involving Jeppiar Cements after his brother allegedly attempted to influence the proceedings. He recorded the message verbatim in his recusal order. LawChakra+1
July 2024: He recused himself from hearing Byju Raveendran’s plea for an interim stay on insolvency proceedings against Think and Learn, Byju’s parent company, citing a conflict of interest due to his previous legal representation of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), a primary creditor in the case.
⚖️ Implications for Judicial Independence
These incidents have raised concerns about the independence of the judiciary and the potential for external influence on judicial decisions. The Supreme Court has previously criticized the NCLAT and NCLT for disregarding its orders and for the appointment of members lacking domain knowledge, which could affect the quality and timeliness of decisions in complex insolvency matters.
🔍 FAQs
Q1: What led to Justice Sharma's recusal in the recent NCLAT case?
Justice Sharma recused himself after being approached by a senior member of the judiciary seeking a favorable order for a particular party in an insolvency case.LawChakra+1
Q2: Has Justice Sharma recused himself from cases before?
Yes, Justice Sharma has previously recused himself from cases due to alleged attempts to influence his decisions, including instances involving his brother and a conflict of interest with the BCCI.
Q3: What are the broader implications of these recusal incidents?
These recusal incidents highlight concerns about the independence of the judiciary and the potential for external pressures to influence judicial decisions, which could undermine public confidence in the legal system.
Published on : 26th August
Published by : ASWINI
www.vizzve.com || www.vizzveservices.com
Follow us on social media: Facebook || Linkedin || Instagram
🛡 Powered by Vizzve Financial
RBI-Registered Loan Partner | 10 Lakh+ Customers | ₹600 Cr+ Disbursed