3rd SC judge recuses himself from hearing lawyer Surendra Gadling’s bail plea

The matter will now be placed before the Chief Justice of India for assigning a new bench to hear the bail petition

Supreme Court judge Shree Chandrashekhar on Tuesday recused himself from hearing lawyer Surendra Gadling’s bail plea in a 2016 arson case, becoming the third judge to do so in the case over the past year.

Justice PK Mishra announced the recusal when the National Investigation Agency (NIA) sought an adjournment before the matter came up for hearing before a bench comprising him and Justice Chandrashekhar. Justice Mishra said the matter had to be adjourned anyway, as Justice Chandrashekhar conveyed his inability to hear it. “This will have to go before another bench as my brother [Justice Chandrashekhar] has some difficulty.”

The matter will now be placed before the Chief Justice of India for assigning a new bench to hear the petition.

On April 2, Justice AS Chandurkar refused to hear the matter. Justice MM Sundresh expressed his inability to continue hearing the matter in August 2025 despite having heard it since July 2024.

Justice Chandrashekhar was the Chief Justice of the Bombay high court, which rejected Gadling’s bail in January 2023, before his elevation to the Supreme Court last month. Justice Chandurkar was a judge at the same high court from 2013 until his elevation to the Supreme Court in May 2025.

Gadling is accused of being part of a conspiracy behind the torching of 80 vehicles transporting iron ore from Surajgarh mines in Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli in December 2016. His bail plea has been pending before the Supreme Court since 2023. This year, the court ordered that the trial in the arson case be expedited. Gadling is also an accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence near Pune.

In the arson case, Gadling has been charged under the stringent anti-terror Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and Indian Penal Code sections related to attempt to murder (307), wrongful restraint (341, 342), mischief by fire (435), and criminal conspiracy (120B).

The high court refused Gadling bail citing the totality of the material on record. It added that there were reasonable grounds for believing the accusations against Gadling of being part of a conspiracy, abetting the commission of terrorist acts, and being a member of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist) are prima facie true.

The high court said the threat posed to the public and the seriousness of the conspiracy alleged against Gadling would far outweigh the other considerations Gadling put forth. Gadling sought bail, saying he is a prominent advocate with a long unblemished record at the bar. He argued that he is his family’s sole breadwinner and had not been involved in any other crime previously. A trial court in March 2022 rejected Gadling’s bail