No Urgent Mentioning After Scheduled Session, except where a death sentence is about to be executed: that was the message from Justice Joymalya Bagchi of the Supreme Court on Tuesday, as a lawyer sought an immediate hearing in a demolition matter.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 27) declined to hear an oral mentioning in a demolition matter after the scheduled mentioning session was over, with Justice Joymalya Bagchi saying that no urgent mentionings would be entertained after that stage except for the execution of a death sentence. The Court asked counsel to mention the matter the next day. [Urgent Mentioning in Demolition Matter]
The remarks came from Justice Joymalya Bagchi in the Supreme Court during the morning sitting. The name of the case, the parties and the authority that issued the demolition notice were not stated in Court.
The exchange in Court
Counsel told the Bench that there was a demolition matter he wished to mention. Justice Bagchi replied that the matter would be called in the course of the mentioning, and the Court could hear him then.
“Whatever you mention in your mentioning, let it be called. We can hear you.”
When counsel pressed that a demolition notice had been issued for the next day, the judge said the position was clear and asked him to mention it the following day.
“Your client’s misfortune”
As counsel repeated that a demolition would take place, Justice Bagchi pointed to the cut-off time for handing in a mentioning slip:
“You were so eager, you should have come and put in your slip by 10:15. If you can wait beyond 10:15, it’s your client’s misfortune.”
Counsel then said that it was a special leave petition and that the brief had reached him only at the last minute. The Court said no, and the mentioning was not taken up.
Background: how urgent mentioning works now
Oral mentioning has been tightly regulated since Chief Justice of India Surya Kant took charge. On his first day in office, November 24, 2025, the CJI said requests for urgent listing should be made in writing through a mentioning slip, with oral mentioning reserved for exceptional cases, such as those where a person’s liberty is at stake or a death sentence is involved.
A Registry circular dated November 29, 2025, which took effect on December 1, 2025, set out the new process. Fresh matters in categories such as regular and anticipatory bail, death penalty, habeas corpus, eviction or dispossession and demolition are to be listed automatically within two working days once defects are cured and the matter is verified, and mentioning for early listing in these categories is no longer accepted.
For an exceptionally urgent fresh matter that cannot wait even that long, the proforma and a letter of urgency must be handed to the Mentioning Officer before the morning session, with the letter explaining why the matter cannot wait. The circular also bars Senior Counsel from orally mentioning matters before any Court.
A separate request for urgent interim orders in a fresh matter is to be lodged by 3 pm on the previous working day. Tuesday’s exchange shows the Bench applying those limits strictly, holding the line even in a demolition case once the slip deadline had passed, while keeping the exception for the execution of a death sentence.
What it means for litigants
The message for the Bar is that the mentioning slip, filed on time, is the route to an urgent hearing. A lawyer who misses the morning cut-off cannot expect the Bench to take up the matter orally later in the day, even where a demolition is imminent, unless a death sentence is about to be carried out. Counsel in Tuesday’s matter was left to mention it on Wednesday.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
Case Title: Urgent Mentioning in Demolition Matter (title not stated in Court)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Judge: Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Date: October 27, 2026
Stage: Oral mentioning declined; counsel asked to mention on October 28
Appearances: Counsel for the petitioner (name not stated)