A Supreme Court lawyer was given 30 seconds to talk about anything other than his case after the bench had already closed the matter. When he tried to mention a legal precedent, the judges politely reminded him that the decision was final.
New Delhi: During a light-hearted moment at a Supreme Court hearing on Thursday, a lawyer’s request for “30 seconds” to argue his case took an unexpected turn when Justice Hrishikesh Roy granted the time, but only for a casual chat, not for legal arguments.
Justice Roy, known for his humor, was hearing a petition with Justice SVN Bhatti. The lawyer was challenging the framing of charges in a criminal case, despite consistent rulings by three lower courts affirming those charges.
When the lawyer attempted to make his case, Justice Roy interjected, saying,
“There are findings by three courts affirming the framing of charges. You want this court to interfere with the consistent findings of three courts?”
The lawyer made a familiar request,
“Give me 30 seconds.”
Justice Roy responded with a playful twist,
“Okay, we will give you 30 seconds, but we are dismissing your petition right away.”
The bench then formally dismissed the petition, recording their decision.
However, the 30 seconds were still available, with a twist.
Prompting a casual conversation, Justice Roy offered,
“Now, you have your 30 seconds. Tell us anything apart from your case. Anything you would want to talk about,”
The lawyer was momentarily taken aback and found himself at a loss for words.
Justice Roy encouraged him to lighten the moment,
“Let’s have a conversation. Tell us what went wrong in Australia with our cricket team. We can talk about anything… how’s the weather today? How much did it rain last night? Or were you sleeping?”
Justice Bhatti added a serious note, explaining the court’s reluctance to intervene,
“There are consistent findings of three courts. To entertain your petition would mean reviewing the facts after the same exercise has been done by three other courts that reached the same conclusion. It can only occur in the rarest of rare cases, which this is not.”
The lawyer tried to mention a legal precedent but was gently reminded that the bench had already closed the matter. While he ultimately didn’t use his “30 seconds” to discuss the Indian cricket team’s performance in Australia, the incident showcased Justice Roy’s ability to inject humor into serious courtroom proceedings a trait appreciated by many in the legal community.
Justice Hrishikesh Roy is a prominent judge of the Supreme Court of India, known for his contributions to Indian jurisprudence and handling significant cases. Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court, he served as the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court and held other judicial roles in Assam and other northeastern states.
During his tenure as Chief Justice of India, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud often asked Justice Roy to conclude hearings on a lighter note whenever they shared a bench. Thursday’s exchange was yet another example of how Justice Roy’s engaging demeanor highlighted that the court can be a space for both wit and wisdom.