Today, 2nd July, Lawyers expressed strong opposition to a recent ‘communication’ seeking to postpone final orders during judicial vacations. This request sparked controversy within legal circles, as it aims to alter the timing of critical judicial decisions.
New Delhi: Lawyers associated with an organization met with a district judge to express concerns over an alleged internal administrative directive advising vacation judges in trial courts not to issue final orders in pending cases during court recess.
The Delhi Lawyers’ Association, led by advocate Sanjeev Nasiar, who also heads the Aam Aadmi Party‘s (AAP) legal cell, formally addressed these objections in a letter to the district judge.
This letter gains importance in light of a recent bail grant by vacation judge Nyaya Bindu to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on June 20, in connection with a money-laundering case related to the alleged excise policy scam. The Delhi High Court later stayed the bail order following an appeal by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The district courts in Delhi closed for summer vacations from June 10 to June 29, during which judicial officers rotated as vacation judges. The Delhi Lawyers’ Association alleged that an administrative directive issued, instructing these judges not to make substantive rulings on cases during the recess. However, the association has not shared this purported directive with the media.
The letter stated,
“As you know, Judge Nyaya Bindu granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on June 20. However, several advocates have complained that soon after this order was passed, an internal administrative order was issued by the District Judge of the Rouse Avenue court, directing all vacation benches that they would not give any final orders in any matters and would merely issue notices for regular benches after the vacation,”
The letter further claimed,
“Such an order is not only administratively and procedurally irregular, but also a travesty of justice.”
The letter emphasized,
“The entire purpose of vacation benches is to address urgent matters that require attention even during vacations. If such an administrative order is issued, it defeats the very purpose of having vacation benches,”
Read Also: Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Directive on Lawyer’s ‘Mental Well-being’
According to several senior advocates, this advisory could lead to unnecessary delays in the resolution of cases, thereby exacerbating the already significant backlog of pending cases in the courts.
The controversy surrounding the advisory requesting judges to refrain from issuing final orders during vacations highlights the delicate balance between administrative efficiency and judicial independence. While the advisory may have been issued with good intentions, its potential impact on the timely administration of justice cannot be overlooked.