Former Delhi High Court judge and former Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court, Justice (Retd.) Siddharth Mridul, has come under scrutiny over allegations that he remained associated with an LPG distributorship, Kitchen Flame, during his 16-year judicial tenure. The controversy has also affected his prospects of contesting the Supreme Court Bar Association presidential election.
Taking the view that holding a constitutional office while simultaneously engaging in business is inconsistent with applicable service rules, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) suspended the LPG dealership on July 6 after Justice Mridul allegedly failed to respond to a show-cause notice.
Judges are bound by their oath of office and judicial codes of conduct, which generally prohibit them from carrying on business or holding positions in public sector undertakings, government bodies or private entities that may create a conflict of interest or compromise judicial independence.
Justice (Retd.) Siddharth Mridul began practising law at the Delhi High Court in 1986. He was appointed as a judge of the Delhi High Court in March 2008 and later became the Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court in October 2023. According to the allegations, however, he continued to remain associated with the LPG distributorship during his tenure as a judge.
Records show that the distributorship agreement between BPCL and Justice Mridul for Kitchen Flame was renewed on August 25, 1995; August 24, 2005; August 23, 2010; August 25, 2015; May 7, 2025; and again on September 29 last year, with the current agreement remaining valid until August 24, 2030.
The matter reportedly surfaced following an ownership dispute raised by the widow of the agency's former manager, along with a separate public complaint.
Two months ago, Monika Yadav, the widow of the agency's former manager, approached the Delhi High Court seeking the transfer of ownership rights of the distributorship in her name.
Subsequently, in December 2025, a formal public complaint was filed alleging that the LPG distributorship was owned by a sitting judge.
Following the complaint, BPCL issued multiple show-cause notices to Justice Mridul, alleging that he had violated service rules by engaging in business while holding judicial office without obtaining the necessary permission. After receiving no response, the company suspended the dealership.
Court proceedings later revealed that following the suspension of the distributorship, Monika Yadav filed another petition before the Delhi High Court, alleging inaction on the part of BPCL and pointing to lapses by the previous owner, Justice Mridul. It was during these proceedings that the matter entered the public domain.
When contacted by India Today for his response to the allegations, Justice (Retd.) Siddharth Mridul declined to comment on the substance of the case.
"Not going to respond to motivated half-truths, false insinuations, jaundiced opinions and innuendos. The record speaks," he said.
India Today also reviewed the websites of the Delhi High Court and the Manipur High Court to verify whether Justice Mridul's asset declarations had been made public. Under the Right to Information Act and a Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court, declarations of assets by sitting and former judges are expected to be publicly available.
On the Delhi High Court's website, Justice Mridul's asset declaration page states, "No file uploaded." The Manipur High Court's website similarly did not contain any information relating to judges' asset declarations.
Responding to a query regarding the absence of his asset declaration on the Delhi High Court's website, Justice Mridul said, "Website should have. Original kept with Chief."
