Amid a controversy over his transfer to the Calcutta High Court, Justice Dinesh Sharma on Friday bid farewell to the Delhi High Court, where he served for three years, saying that he “respects the dissent shown by the Bar Association of Calcutta”.
On March 28, elected representatives of the three wings of the Bar in the Calcutta High Court had written to Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, requesting reconsideration and withdrawal of the collegium’s recommendation to transfer Justice Sharma, citing “serious complaints” against him during his tenure at Delhi High Court.
“From here, I would like to assure the Bar Association at Calcutta that I will serve the institution to the best of my abilities and intentions. I will also say…I respect the dissent shown by the Bar Association of Calcutta, they have their right to express their dissent and I duly respect (that) and I don’t carry anything (against them) in my heart, and I fully respect whatever they hold,” Justice Sharma said.
After the Centre notified Justice Sharma’s transfer on April 1, the elected representatives of the Bar at Calcutta High Court had written to the Calcutta High Court Chief Justice, requesting that he not be assigned any judicial work.
Meanwhile, Ved Prakash Sharma, vice-chairperson at Bar Council of India (BCI) and representative to BCI from the Bar Council of Delhi, said at the full court farewell reference that the Calcutta High Court bar members’ protest had cast a shadow over what was otherwise a routine process.
“As we bid farewell to Justice Sharma on his transfer to Calcutta High Court, we must recognise that judicial transfers are an integral part of our system, aimed at maintaining the independence and integrity of the judiciary. However, recent developments, including the unfortunate controversy surrounding another judicial transfer and the call for a strike by the Calcutta Bar Association, have cast a shadow on what should otherwise be a seamless process,” he said.
“While differences in opinion may arise, it is imperative that as officers of justice, we uphold our collective responsibility to ensure the smooth functioning of our courts and maintain public confidence in our justice delivery system. At a time when concerns about transparency in the judiciary are being widely discussed, the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court judges to declare their assets and make the details publicly available is a commendable step. This move strengthens public confidence in judicial integrity and will enhance dignity and credibility of our judicial institutions….our strength lies in our ability to rise above temporary turbulence and reaffirm the fundamental principles that define our profession…,” he added.
Story continues below this ad
The bar and the bench must work together to ensure that the faith of the people in the judiciary remains unshaken “irrespective of occasional aberrations”, he said. “I have no doubt that once the members of the Calcutta HC experience Justice Sharma’s fairness, humility, and impeccable manner in which he conducts court proceedings…in due course they may even reconsider and regret the stance they have recently taken,” he added.
Justice Sharma had recently stayed the suspension orders against students of Jamia Millia Islamia following students’ protests against the police crackdown on anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) demonstrations on campus in 2019.
Referring to this decision, N Hariharan, senior advocate and Delhi High Court Bar Association president, remarked that it reaffirmed that peaceful dissent is a vital part of democratic life. “You protected not just their right to education but reaffirmed that peaceful dissent is a vital part of democratic life. You observed that participation in such protests is a form of civil engagement and essential training in the values and norms that sustain a free society,” Hariharan said.
In November 2024, Justice Sharma refused to quash an FIR against telecom service provider Matrix Cellular International Services and others who were accused of selling defective and substandard oxygen concentrators at inflated prices during the peak of the second wave of the Covid pandemic.
Story continues below this ad
In September 2024, while dealing with the bail pleas of the coaching class co-owners where three UPSC aspirants had drowned and died in Delhi, Justice Sharma suggested to the lieutenant governor that a committee chaired by a former judge be appointed to ensure that coaching centres do not operate by violating norms and regulations. He also suggested that the government consider designating a specific place in the city from where coaching centres can operate.
Justice Sharma joined the Delhi Judicial Service in 1992 and was promoted to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service in 2003. As a judicial officer, he worked as the secretary of the Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee; director (academics) of the Delhi Judicial Academy; registrar (vigilance); registrar general of the Delhi High Court; and principal district and sessions judge, New Delhi.
He has been associated with the Vulnerable Witness Deposition Complex programme, drafting its guidelines for the Delhi High Court, and the training of the stakeholders in the programme organised by the high court since its inception in 2010.
Justice Sharma was elevated as a high court judge in 2022.