Chief justice of India, DY Chandrachud decided on quick disposal of the cases related to bail and transfer petitions. Of the total 6,844 cases disposed of over 29 working days, where 1,163 are bail applications and 1,353 are transfer petitions. These petitions, involving matters relating of personal liberty and family disputes, according to data released by the supreme court administration on Monday. There were 10 such days between November 9 and December 16 when the supreme court drew curtains on more than 300 cases.
“We have 3,000 transfer petitions pending. After a full court meeting, we agreed that every day we would take up 10 transfer petitions. We have 13 benches right now, so we will dispose of 130 every day and 650 cases weekly. In five weeks before winter vacation, all TPs will be over,” said justice Chandrachud.
In the last week alone before the winter vacation, a total of 1,663 cases were disposed of. The CJI also said that all benches will additionally take up 10 bail matters every day. “these are issues of family matters
and personal liberty so we will prioritise them,” said justice Chandrachud.
Union law minister Kiren Rijiju’s statement in the Rajya Sabha where he suggested the top court to avoid hearing bail pleas and “frivolous PLIs” to tackle the large pendency of cases. “if the supreme court starts hearing bail applications or frivolous PILs (public interest litigation), it will cause lots of extra burden…more than 4 crores (40 million) cases are pending in trial courts where the government has a stake. We give money, support to create better infrastructure. But we have to ask the judiciary to ensure that only deserving people are given justice,” Rijiju said.
He even weighted over the staggering pendency of cases on the vacancies in the judiciary. A congress lawmaker, Rajeev Shukla reacted over the pendency of cases and said, “currently, the government has limited powers to fill the vacancies…other than considering the name recommended by the collegium, the government does not have the mandate to look for other names,” the minister said. the need to fill the vacancies was heightened by Law minister Rijiju and said, “We also convey that the names recommended should be of a certain quality and also represent India’s diversity taking into account gender, caste and religion,” in response, justice Chandrachud said, “no case is too small for the supreme court and no case is too big because we have to answer the call of conscience and the cry of liberty of our citizens.
That is why we are here and these are not one-off cases. He further enumerates and said, “if we do not act in matters of personal liberty and grant relief, then what are we doing here?”
Written By: Ayushi Bhushan, Banasthali University
0 Comments