The Supreme Court of India has ordered an inquiry into allegations that a member of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) was approached by a high-ranking member of the judiciary to influence a case. The inquiry was prompted by a disclosure from Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, a judicial member of the NCLAT, who stated that he had been urged by "one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary of this country" to rule in favor of a specific litigant.

The Supreme Court has directed its secretary general to conduct the investigation to identify the judge, potentially from either the High Courts or the Supreme Court, who allegedly attempted to sway the case's outcome. The revelation emerged after a bench headed by Justice Sharma recused itself from the case, citing the attempted influence. In the order, Justice Sharma stated, "We are anguished to observe, that one of us, Member (Judicial), has been approached by one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary of this country for seeking an order in favour of a particular party. Hence, I recuse to hear the matter. Place before the hon'ble chairperson for nomination of an appropriate bench".

The case in question involves insolvency proceedings against KLSR Infratech Ltd, a Hyderabad-based real estate company. The case was being heard by a two-member bench consisting of Justice Sharma and technical member Jatindranath Swain. KLSR Infratech had appealed to the NCLAT, challenging a decision by the Hyderabad bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) that permitted A.S. Met Corp Pvt. Ltd, a creditor, to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against it.

KLSR Infratech argued that it was financially sound, with a consistent annual turnover exceeding Rs 300 crore over the past five years. The company also pointed to a First Information Report (FIR) filed against the directors of A.S. Met Corp, alleging misconduct, and claimed the directors were absconding, suggesting the existence of disputes that would make insolvency proceedings unwarranted. A.S. Met Corp countered that the FIR was filed after the demand notice had been issued and that its directors had been granted anticipatory bail by the Telangana High Court and were not absconding. The NCLT accepted A.S. Met Corp's arguments and allowed insolvency proceedings, a decision that KLSR Infratech then challenged before the appellate tribunal. The judgment in the matter had been reserved on June 18, 2025, with both parties given an additional week to file written submissions.

This incident has raised concerns about potential case-fixing within the judiciary. The Supreme Court's investigation aims to uncover the truth of the allegations and maintain the integrity of the judicial system.