On Thursday, Justice DY Chandrachud remarked that the only answer to adjournment seeking antics was live-streaming of matters so the public could see who is taking time and why cases are adjourned.
The Bench was considering a 2018 SLP when the petitioner’s counsel requested an adjournment. The junior counsel submitted that the arguing counsel was unavailable, and when the Bench asked the counsel to argue the case, she stated that she was not equipped to assist the court. When the Bench asked for the AOR, the counsel replied that even the AOR would not be able to argue immediately.
As per the Bench, such acts bring disrepute to reports, and thousands of cases are pending. Can the court say that they are pending as lawyers are not arguing the cases?
The Bench observed that lawyers are misusing juniors and the courts are helpless, and the only option was injustice by hearing one side, which the court does not want to do. As per the court, advocates are playing with the court’s sense of justice to get adjournments.
Justice Chnadrachud commented that the only answer was to live-stream matters so the public could see why cases keep getting adjourned. He further stated that Judges sit from 10:30-4 PM, and even though they have repeatedly been saying that no adjournments would be given, counsels keep on requesting. Justice Chandrachud further stated that the CJI was very keen that old matters pending for long should be heard.
When the junior counsel sought time till Tuesday, the Bench refused and listed the case on Friday.
The Bench asked the junior counsel to bring in the AOR to argue the case if the arguing counsel was unavailable.