Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of the Supreme Court of India has voiced concerns over the increasing number of frivolous criminal cases, which he believes are diminishing the credibility of India’s justice system on the global stage. Speaking at the 4th Discourse organized by the Centre for Discourses on Criminal and Constitutional Jurisprudence at the India International Centre in New Delhi, Justice Bhuyan emphasized the urgent need for trial courts to take action against such cases.
Addressing Frivolous Cases
Justice Bhuyan highlighted that many criminal cases are being filed on trivial grounds such as consuming food, reciting poems, participating in demonstrations, raising slogans, making social media comments, performing stand-up comedy, and even on the basis of book and movie titles. He remarked, “The accusations are ridiculous and often border on an affront to one’s intelligence. Despite this, the registration of such cases continues unabated, with some cases even proceeding to trial.”
The Burden on Courts
The concern over frivolous cases is further compounded by the staggering number of pending criminal cases. As reported by the National Judicial Data Grid, as of September 17, a total of 4.27 crore cases are pending in courts across India. Of these, 4.07 crore (95.31%) are before trial courts, 19.84 lakh (4.64%) before High Courts, and 22,143 cases are pending in the Supreme Court.
Justice Bhuyan pointed out, “The court system is almost bursting at the seams with the volume of cases it needs to handle. The addition of frivolous cases only exacerbates the situation, creating an unmanageable burden for trial courts.” He urged trial courts to initiate a special drive to eliminate such frivolous cases, noting that failing to do so would continue to tarnish the reputation of India’s justice system.
Challenges and Ethical Considerations
On the issue of accused individuals not cooperating with investigators, Justice Bhuyan was direct in his criticism. He said, “I find it quite amusing when State counsel tells the court that the petitioner had appeared before the investigating officer but is not ‘cooperating’.”
Regarding the quality of legal representation in capital and life imprisonment cases, Justice Bhuyan refrained from making detailed comments due to existing controversies. However, he emphasized the importance of ethical conduct in the legal process, stating, “A prosecutor who hides evidence to secure a conviction and a defense lawyer who tampers with a witness to secure an acquittal commit the same wrong: placing outcome above the process.”
Justice Bhuyan’s remarks underscore the critical need for reform in handling criminal cases to maintain the integrity and efficiency of India’s legal system.
