Supreme Court’s Innovative Approach for Pending Constitution Bench Cases
In a recent proposal, the Supreme Court of India suggested implementing daily afternoon sessions to address long-standing seven-judge Constitution Bench cases. This initiative aims to streamline the court’s workload by allocating the morning hours to new and miscellaneous cases. This strategic scheduling was discussed by the Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.
The court is currently managing 29 pending Constitution Bench matters, some of which may have become outdated but still hold unresolved legal questions. CJI Surya Kant highlighted the need to address these matters, stating, “There are 29 matters. Some may have become academic, but the legal issue may still survive.”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal’s Insights
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who presented arguments before the Bench, concurred with the CJI’s observation regarding the academic relevance of these issues. “The academic issue still remains because there are two contrary views. It will have to be settled,” Sibal emphasized, highlighting the necessity for resolution.
Proposed Scheduling Solutions
To expedite these proceedings, CJI Surya Kant proposed a schedule where these cases could be heard daily from 2 PM to 4 PM. This would prevent the backlog of new cases while allowing continuous attention to unresolved matters. “One possibility is to list these matters every day from 2 PM to 4 PM. We can hear them for two hours daily without allowing fresh matters to pile up,” the CJI suggested.
Alternatively, Sibal proposed a concentrated three-day weekly schedule for these hearings, specifically on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. CJI Kant, however, pointed out a potential issue with this approach, noting that it might impede the handling of routine cases. “That creates difficulty because routine, miscellaneous and fresh matters cannot then be taken up,” he explained.
Weighing the Options
Another counsel suggested that afternoon sessions could maintain a balance, though limiting the hearings to two hours might extend the timeline for resolutions. The counsel proposed that continuous hearings could better manage the time allocated for each case. “The afternoon arrangement would maintain a balance, but restricting the hearing to two hours could prolong it. If heard continuously, Your Lordships can control the time … If the matters are heard every afternoon, the Bench can continue for four or five days a week while taking fresh matters before lunch,” the counsel added.
The CJI expressed openness to trialing both approaches, stating, “Both arrangements have their advantages. We can take up the first matter on a trial basis and see how it progresses. We will have to work it out.” This willingness to experiment with new procedures underscores the Court’s commitment to efficiency and thoroughness in addressing complex legal issues.
As the Supreme Court weighs these innovative scheduling solutions, the legal community and the public will closely observe how these practices may impact the resolution of significant constitutional debates.
