सुप्रीम कोर्ट में याचिका: न्यायाधीश शर्मा ने बेटे का ईसीआई के साथ संबंध खुलासा नहीं किया

Justice Sharma Didn't Disclose Son's Link To ECI During CEC Appointment Case Hearing : Petitioner To Supreme Court

Debby Jain

7 Oct 2026 3:50 PM IST

Had Justice Sharma disclosed the link, the petitioners would have sought his recusal, the recall application stated.

An application for recall of the 2-judge bench split verdict in Election Commissioners' Appointment case has been filed before the Supreme Court claiming that Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, who was part of the bench which rendered the decision, did not disclose his son's association with the Election Commission.

"The Petitioners state on record that the engagement of Hon'ble Justice Satish Chandra Sharma's son as the standing counsel for the ECI before the Madhya Pradesh High Court was not disclosed to the parties by Hon'ble Justice Satish Chandra Sharma at any point in time during the 5 hearings in the matter."

The application, filed by Naman Sherstra, avers that had the association of Justice Sharma's son with ECI been known prior, the applicants would have requested for recusal of the judge. The absence of disclosure deprived them of the opportunity to make such a request before the split verdict was pronounced, they state.

On September 23, the split verdict was delivered by Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma in the petitions challenging the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

When Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan mentioned the application today, CJI Surya Kant said that he will examine and take a call.

The application, filed through AoR Pawan Reley, seeks recall of the common order passed by the bench (referring the matter to a 5-judge bench) as well as Justice Sharma's opinion. It categorically states that it does not seek recall of Justice Datta's opinion.

The applicants urge that their grievance is limited to the non-disclosure of Justice Sharma's son's association with ECI, and there is no attempt to impute any bias, motive or want of good faith to the judge.

"The grievance is much narrower: whether in view of an existing professional engagement of an immediate family member of the Hon'ble Judge concerned with the institution whose statutory composition and with the functionaries of such institution whose appointments were directly under challenge, the Hon'ble Judge ought to have disclosed the fact of such engagement to the parties when the proceedings were ongoing?" the application states.

The applicants mention that after the split verdict, Justice Sharma's son's association with ECI came to their notice from the LiveLaw article titled 'Propriety Questions Emerge As Son Of Justice SC Sharma, Who Heard ECI & Medha Roopam Cases, Is Election Commission's Lawyer'. On coming across the report, the applicants state that they carried out independent verification as well, following which it was confirmed that Justice SC Sharma's son is, in fact, ECI Standing Counsel before the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

Further, the judge's son was found to have been engaged as ECI Standing Counsel on July 10, 2024. The applicants also discovered High Court orders which showed that he appeared for ECI.

The application further states that public records show that Justice Sharma's son has regularly appeared for the ECI before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Copies of two orders dated July 29, 2026 and September 1, 2026 have been annexed to support this assertion.

The application argues that proof of actual bias or prejudice is not necessary and that the issue has to be assessed from the perspective of a fair-minded and informed person apprised of all relevant facts.

The applicant has also relied upon the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life, stating that it requires judges to ensure that justice is not only done but is manifestly seen to be done. The application refers to the provision concerning immediate family members at the Bar and judges hearing matters in which a family member, close relation or friend is concerned.

In this backdrop, the application was filed for recall of Justice Sharma's opinion and listing of the Election Commissioners' Appointment case before 2 judges.

Powered by Nyaya 247 News