On Wednesday, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure with a prevalent practice among lawyers seeking adjournments on the pretext that a senior advocate is set to argue their case. The incident occurred during a hearing of a commercial dispute when a lawyer requested a four-week adjournment, stating that Senior Advocate Harish Salve, currently abroad, would handle the matter upon his return.
Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, who presided over the bench, sternly addressed the lawyer’s assumption. “Are you under an impression that we will adjourn a matter if you take the name of a senior counsel? This tendency of the lawyers at the bar must stop. We are not going to adjourn matters just because you take the name of any senior counsel,” they remarked, clearly frustrated with the delay tactics often employed in legal procedures.
Despite their initial firm stance against the unnecessary postponement of court proceedings, the bench ultimately conceded to the adjournment request. This decision underlines the judiciary’s ongoing struggle to balance strict legal protocols with the realities of legal practice, where senior counsels’ schedules can influence case timelines.
This isn’t the first instance this year where the Supreme Court has had to remind legal professionals about decorum and procedural seriousness. Earlier in January, the court reprimanded a lawyer for addressing the bench from his car, stressing the importance of maintaining dignity in the courtroom.
