On Thursday, the Supreme Court sharply criticized a lawyer who requested an adjournment in a case where his client has been incarcerated for an extended period. The incident unfolded during a session presided over by Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra, who expressed their displeasure with the delay.
Justice Narasimha specifically questioned the lawyer’s decision to seek postponement despite the urgency of the situation. “Aren’t you seeing how we are deciding the criminal cases? Is it not a good day for you to argue? Your client has been behind bars for so long, and you are seeking an adjournment. Is that a good thing?” he inquired, pointing to the impact of prolonged delays on the administration of justice.
The lawyer defended his request by stating that a senior lawyer was needed to argue the matter effectively. Nevertheless, the court reluctantly agreed to reschedule the hearing, albeit with evident frustration.
This incident highlights a critical issue within the Indian judiciary system — the frequent adjournments in criminal cases, which often draw criticism for slowing down the legal process. Although lawyers sometimes request delays based on their clients’ instructions, these adjournments contribute to an already significant backlog of cases.
Recognizing the challenges posed by such delays, the Supreme Court has recently indicated it is considering measures to reduce the backlog, including the potential appointment of ad hoc judges to High Courts to expedite the processing of criminal appeals.
