The Delhi High Court highlighted the “acute shortage of judges,” leading to cases remaining unheard. It called the situation “extremely painful” for judges handling overflowing dockets.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has recently expressed deep concern about the “acute shortage of judges” when compared to the population and the increasing number of court cases. This shortage has led to many matters remaining unheard for long periods.
While hearing a case Mukesh Kumar Gupta Vs Central Bureau of Investigation, the high court said that because of “overflowing dockets,” it is unable to decide appeals within a reasonable time. It also noted that “when some matters remain unheard, it is extremely painful for the judge.”
ALSO READ: Ex-SC Judge B N Srikrishna: “Delay in Justice Is Denial of Justice”
These remarks were made during the hearing of a plea filed by a man who was convicted in a cheating and forgery case. He had asked for permission to travel abroad to attend a Rotary Club assembly in Almaty, Kazakhstan, and Georgia, to build his social connections and expand his business.
The judge handling the case, Justice Girish Kathpalia, observed,
“In my considered view, since on account of overflowing dockets, this court is unable to decide the appeals within a reasonable period of time, the right to even leisure trips to certain extent ought not be declined.”
Considering the situation, the court allowed the man to travel abroad from May 1 to May 11, but only after he furnished a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh along with one surety of the same amount.
The court also commented that events like the Rotary Club assembly are mostly
“more in the form of general get-togethers where social and business relations are developed.”
Further explaining the critical situation in the judiciary, the court said,
“On account of acute shortage of judges as compared to the general population and the litigation quantum, for a long time, the list of regular matters does not reach till the end of the day of hearing.”
The judge added,
“Rather, many times even beyond 05:00 pm when the courts rise for the day, some of the matters remain unheard, which is extremely painful for the judge. In such an uncertain atmosphere, depriving the applicant/ appellant of free movement, even if to enjoy leisure trips cannot be justified.”
The court took note that the man’s appeal against his conviction was filed in 2019 and admitted by the earlier judge, and was still pending to be heard as a regular matter.
The man’s lawyer argued that he had previously been allowed to travel abroad and that at the age of 67 years, there was very little chance of him fleeing from justice.
On the other hand, the lawyer for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) opposed the request. They informed the court that earlier, the man was not allowed to travel abroad as it was merely a leisure trip, and expressed concerns that if permitted, the man might not return.
Finally, while granting the permission, the high court stressed the importance of ensuring that the man would come back to face the ongoing legal proceedings. It said this could be achieved by putting “appropriate conditions” on him.
The Court, however, opined that it could not deny the applicant free movement when it was uncertain about when his appeal would be heard next.
the Court said.
“In such uncertain atmosphere, depriving the applicant/appellant free movement, even if to enjoy leisure trips cannot be justified,”
Justice Kathpalia added that the Court could impose conditions to ensure that the man does not abscond.
Advocate Vikas Arora appeared for the applicant/ appellant.
Advocate Ripudaman Bhardwaj appeared for the CBI.
READ ORDER:
Click Here to Read More On Pahalgam Terror Case
