Supreme Court bench sets time limit for lawyers, says time to change old habits
PrintListen to this Article
Wondering which country in the world would allow lawyers to argue a case for hours and days together, the bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy said that time has come for lawyers to change their habits.
“We would like to be enlightened which court in the world permits lawyers to argue for days and hours together. Even in England, I have failed to find such a practice. Time has come to change the habits,” the bench said.
The observations by the court came on a petition filed by Yatin Narendra Oza, a veteran lawyer from Gujarat who was stripped of the “senior advocate” designation following contempt proceedings initiated against him by the Gujarat High Court. Oza had made distasteful remarks against the judges of the high court and was defended before the top court by senior advocates, Arvind Datar and Abhishek Manu Singhvi. His petition has been pending in the top court since August 2020.
The court directed Datar and Singhvi to take 30 minutes each and complete submissions within an hour. The Gujarat high court, the contesting party, was allotted 45 minutes while intervention applications filed in the case were told to finish submissions in 15 minutes. Even on submissions on law and citation of judgments, the bench told lawyers on both sides to file a three-page synopsis on law citing one best judgment on the point.
Imposing this discipline on lawyers, the bench said, “Many times we find a 30-page synopsis filed for a 28-page writ petition. Lawyers must understand that in this kind of a hearing, how we can justify to a litigant whose appeal is pending for 10 years that some matters are being given priority and are heard for hours together.”
Both Datar and Singhvi agreed to abide by the time restrictions on the next date of hearing on September 1.
Datar pointed out that a similar system prevails in the Supreme Court of the United States where lawyers are given 25 minutes to argue a case and five minutes to reply to the other side’s contentions. He was referring to Rule 28 of the US Supreme Court Rules on oral hearing which states, “Unless the Court directs otherwise, each side is allowed one-half hour for the argument.”
The change being envisaged by the Supreme Court bench also found reflection in a recent judgment authored by justice Kaul. There, justice Kaul, heading a three-judge bench, referred to Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights which recognised the right of fair trial and public hearing to be completed within a “reasonable time”.
The July 8 judgment said, “Delay in judicial proceedings has been the bane of our country and there cannot be a refusal to part ways from old practices especially when they have outlived their purpose…Instead of restricting oral arguments court has become a competing arena of who gets to argue for the longest time.”
As of July 2, the Supreme Court has 69,212 pending matters of which 447 matters are Constitution bench matters. This fact was taken note of by Justice Kaul in his judgment that said, “The time spent on routine matters leaves little time to settle legal principles pending before larger Benches that may have an impact down the line on the judicial system.”
Justice Kaul’s court is also unique as the daily list of cases comes with a special instruction for lawyers which says, “Parties to get ready with a short synopsis of not more than three pages each in the final hearing/disposal matters.”
Category : General | Comments : 0 | Hits : 1225
Retirement fund body EPFO has said it will no longer use Aadhaar as a valid document for proof of date of birth. In an official circular on January 16, the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) said the decision to remove Aadhaar was taken following a directive from the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI). As per the circular, Aadhaar is also being removed from the list of documents for correction in date of birth.
A five-day-long Special Parliament Session will be held from Monday. A Parliamentary Bulletin said, that on the first day a discussion on the Parliamentary Journey of 75 years starting from Samvidhan Sabha - Achievements, Experiences, Memories, and Learnings will be held in Lok Sabha. The Government has listed Bill on the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner, and other election commissioners in the upcoming Parliament Session. Apart from this The Advocates (Amendment) Bill, Th...
Artificial intelligence can substitute neither the human intelligence nor the humane element in the adjudicatory process, the Delhi high court has held and said ChatGPT can't be the basis of adjudication of legal or factual issues in a court of law. Justice Prathiba M Singh stated that the accuracy and reliability of AI generated data is still in the grey area and at best, such a tool can be utilised for a preliminary understanding or for preliminary research. The court's observati...
Domain + Website + Hosting + 2 email ids @ Just Rs.3100/- with 30 days Money Back Guarantee. CASANSAAR offers a Golden opportunity for Professionals, where they could create their own stunning website with multiple designs and templates to choose. It will be completely your own space, which is going to be a Dynamic Website and could be edited as per your wish. Now Get 2 Email ID's with Your Own Websi...
The Delhi High Court Monday sought the Centre’s stand in a plea against a notification where chartered accountants, company secretaries and cost accountants have been included among “reporting entities” under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula granted time to Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, who appeared for the Centre, to “seek instructions” and listed the ma...
Comments