Dushyant Dave Questions Supreme Court's Case Reassignments, Appeals To CJI Chandrachud

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

In a recent development, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave penned an open letter to Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, voicing his concerns over the reassignment of sensitive cases by the Supreme Court’s Registry. Dave’s letter highlights a pattern of cases, particularly those involving human rights, freedom of speech, democracy, and the functioning of statutory and constitutional institutions, being shifted from their original benches to others, despite the availability of the senior judge from the first coram.

Also read- Arvind Datar Advocates For High Courts To Handle Disqualification Cases Under Tenth Schedule, Not Speakers (lawchakra.in)

Dave’s letter underscores the violation of the Supreme Court Rules and the Handbook on Practice and Procedure of the Court, which govern the listing of cases. He notes,

“I have personally come across a number of cases listed before various Hon’ble Benches upon first listing and/or in which notice have been issued, being taken away from those Hon’ble Benches and listed before other Hon’ble Benches.”

The senior counsel expressed his dismay at the disregard for established practice and convention, pointing out that matters listed before Court Nos. 2, 4, 6, 7, among others, have been shifted and listed before different benches, ignoring the seniority of the first coram. Dave’s letter also mentions that he had attempted to meet the Chief Justice in person to discuss these grievances but was unable to secure an appointment.

Also read-Supreme Court Extends Satyendar Jain’s Interim Bail Until December 11 In Money Laundering Case (lawchakra.in)

Highlighting the extraordinary power conferred on the CJI by the Handbook on Practice and Procedure of the Court, Dave stressed that this power should be exercised in accordance with established practice. He expressed concern that the current practice does not bode well for the institution and urged the CJI to take corrective measures.

Dave’s letter reflects a broader concern within the legal community about the integrity of the judicial process. He mentioned that many of his colleagues, including senior advocates and Advocates on Record (AoRs), have drawn attention to various cases being listed before different benches after their initial appearance.

The letter concludes with a poignant remark on the expectations set by CJI Chandrachud’s appointment:

“On your appointment, strong hopes were created in the minds of Citizens that under your Leadership, the Supreme Court of India will rise to greater heights, the march towards which has somehow paused for some time earlier. The scars caused on account of such improprieties in the past few years on justice delivery have not healed as yet.”

This development raises significant questions about the administrative processes within the Supreme Court and the implications for justice delivery in India.