15 Dec 2022 12:10 PM GMT
The Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju on Wednesday said that the Supreme Court should hear only those cases which are relevant and appropriate for being taken up by a Constitutional Court."If the Supreme Court starts hearing bail applications and starts hearing all frivolous PILs, it will definitely cause a lot of extra burden on the Honourable Court, because Supreme Court by and large is...
The Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju on Wednesday said that the Supreme Court should hear only those cases which are relevant and appropriate for being taken up by a Constitutional Court.
"If the Supreme Court starts hearing bail applications and starts hearing all frivolous PILs, it will definitely cause a lot of extra burden on the Honourable Court, because Supreme Court by and large is treated as a Constitutional court," he said.
The Minister was speaking in the Rajya Sabha in connection with the newly passed New Delhi International Arbitration Centre (Amendment) Bill which seeks to rename New Delhi International Arbitration Centre as the "India International Arbitration Centre."
While responding to certain questions raised by the members of the House in connection with output of the Indian courts, the Minister said that close to 70,000 cases were pending before the Supreme Court.
With more than 4.25 Crore cases pending in lower courts, the Minister said that, "we have to also ask judiciary to ensure that the deserving people are given justice and those causing unnecessary burden are taken care of, so that they don't cause disturbances while the court is functioning or the court is discharging its duties."
Speaking further on the pendency of the cases, the Minister said, "the Government shall always ensure that the independence of judiciary is not tinkled around with. We will be always protecting the independence of judiciary and will strengthen the judiciary. But when we talk about pending cases which are touching 5 Crore, people definitely question the Law Minister. These are matters which definitely concern every citizen of this country and every citizen deserves to know why so many cases are pending in our country."
Talking about the budgetary allocation and the proactive support of the Government to the Judiciary, the Minister said that, "no court in India could say that they were wanting the support of Government, especially for infrastructure."
The Minister also voiced his views on the role of judicial officers. He said, "the main duty of the judges is that they are the arbitrators, the people who are going to deliver justice. But judgments and justice can be given from the ground as well, not from the courtrooms alone."
"You can go out to the field, judges can also go out of the courtroom and deliver justice. That's why we are talking about mobile courts and lok adalats. On my field visits, with Chief Justices of various High Courts, I have seen people get excited and emotional that without them requiring to go to the courts, the courts came to their doorsteps – that's called justice at the doorstep of people."
Finally, the Minister also addressed the issue of renaming of High Courts and the inconsistencies and variations where some high courts are named after the State, while others are named after cities where they are located.
He said, "about naming of Madras High Court to Tamil Nadu High Court, Bombay High Court to Maharashtra High Court, Allahabad High Court to Uttar Pradesh High Court, or Calcutta High Court … I will have a discussion with the Chief Justice of India and the Government of India is always open to discussion."
The Minister concluded that he could not give assurances or final words, since there were norms and a certain process had to be followed. However, he assured that all the questions raised by the Members were well registered.