News Cubic Studio

Truth and Reality

Supreme Court disposed of 6844 cases in 7 days, CJI Chandrachud said – more focus on bail cases

Justice DY Chandrachud took over as the CJI on 9 November. After assuming office in the Supreme Court, till December 16, the apex court has disposed of 6844 cases. It also includes 1163 Gnat cases. A total of 5,898 cases were registered during this period. The highest number of 277 cases were filed on 9 November, while the highest disposal was 384 on 12 December. Apart from bail and other matters, the Supreme Court also disposed of 1,353 transfer petitions arising out of matrimonial disputes.

On November 18, CJI Chandrachud had announced that all benches of the court would take up 10 transfer petitions and 10 bail pleas every day. He said the decision was taken in a full court meeting and all transfer petitions pending before the Supreme Court would be decided before the winter break.

Hearing on bail is most important

The CJI had said that after the transfer petitions, he will consider all the 10 bail matters as they involve questions of personal liberty. He had said, “I have also directed that we will give priority to bail matters. That’s why 10 bail matters every day after transfer petitions because it is a matter of personal liberty. Ten transfer petitions because they are family matters, its After all the children have 10 bail cases, then we will start regular work.

Rijiju’s advice- focus on relevant issues

On December 14, the pendency of cases in the apex court was flagged by Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju while speaking in the Rajya Sabha. He said that he had urged the court to take up those matters which are relevant and which are suitable for the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court of India starts hearing bail petitions, if the Supreme Court of India starts hearing all frivolous PILs, it will surely cost a lot of extra money to the Hon. Court itself because the Supreme Court is considered as a constitutional court by and large.

However, in an order on December 15, the court said that the right to personal liberty is a precious and inalienable right recognized by the Constitution and non-interference with it may lead to a ‘serious offence’.