Between November 9, when Justice D. Y. Chandrachud became Chief Justice of India, and December 16, the last day of work before the winter break, the Supreme Court closed a total of 6,844 cases, including 1,163 bail cases.
During this time, a total of 5,898 cases were brought to court.
Also: Kapil Sibal in an interview: “Kiren Rijiju’s comments about judges and the Supreme Court are disturbing and completely out of line.”
The most cases were filed on November 9, with 277, and the most cases were closed on December 12, with 384.
In addition to bail and other things, the court also dealt with 1,353 transfer petitions that had to do with marriage disputes.
On November 18, CJI Chandrachud said that every day, 10 transfer petitions and 10 bail applications will be heard by all 10 benches of the court.
He said that the decision was made at a meeting of the whole court and that the Supreme Court will decide on all transfer petitions before the winter break.
The CJI had also said that after the transfer petitions are dealt with, all benches will look at 10 bail cases because they deal with people’s freedom.
“I have also told you to give bail matters the most attention. So, after transfer petitions, there are 10 bail cases every day because this is a matter of freedom. Then there are 10 bail cases from all the benches, because those are family matters. “Then we’ll get back to work,” he had said.
In a speech to the Rajya Sabha on December 14, Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju brought up the cases that were still being heard at the top court. He said that he had asked the court to “take up the cases that are important and that the Supreme Court should take up.” If the Supreme Court of India starts hearing bail applications and all frivolous PILs, it will definitely put a lot of extra work on the court itself, since the Supreme Court is usually seen as a constitutional court.
But in an order on December 16, the court said that “the right to personal liberty is a precious and inalienable right recognised by the Constitution” and that if it doesn’t step in, it can even lead to a “serious miscarriage of justice.”
This was written in an order by CJI Chandrachud and Justice P S Narasimha. The order said that a man’s sentence for breaking the Electricity Act should run at the same time, not one after the other.
“The history of this Court shows that issues of the moment, both in terms of law and the Constitution, come up in what seem to be small and routine cases involving citizen complaints. So, the fact that this Court steps in to protect the freedom of citizens is based on good Constitutional principles found in Part III. Article 32 and Article 136 of the Constitution of India say that the Court has the power to judge. The Constitution says that the right to personal freedom is important and cannot be taken away. The Supreme Court has a clear constitutional duty, obligation, and function to handle such complaints. “Nothing more, nothing less,” the SC said.