In a first, single judge SC bench to hear bail appeals
NEW DELHI: Over 69 years after it came into existence, the Supreme Court of India will, for the first time, have a judge sitting singly to decide on matters of bail and anticipatory bail — in cases which carry a punishment of up to seven years’ imprisonment — and transfer of cases from one state to another.
SC Rules 2013 have been amended to allow the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to nominate any apex court judge and constitute a single-judge bench. The notification of the changes introduced in the rules was published in the Gazette of India on September 19.
The move, a Supreme Court registry official said, is aimed at bringing down pendency in the top court. It is not yet clear how many such benches would be set up by the CJI. On Monday, four new judges would be administered the oath, taking up the strength of the apex court to 34.
Several transfer petitions related to matrimonial disputes have choked the system. “Such matters can be disposed of quickly by a single judge,” the official cited above said on condition of anonymity.
At present, single-judge benches sit on Mondays and Fridays to hear routine matters such as applications to condone delays in refiling a petition after defects are rectified, to exempt a petitioner from surrendering in a criminal case or allowing more time to remove defects in petitions and applications for renewal of fixed deposits. The new rule would allow single judges to now decide cases on the judicial side.
“The following category of matters may be heard and disposed off finally by a judge sitting singly, nominated by the Chief Justice of India, Special Leave Petitions arising out of grant, dismissal or rejection of Bail Application or Anticipatory Bail Application filed under Sections 437, 438 and 439 of the CrPC involving offences punishable with sentence up to seven years imprisonment... Any other category of cases notified by the Chief Justice from time to time,” the notification reads.
THE MOVE, A SUPREME COURT REGISTRY OFFICIAL SAID, IS AIMED AT BRINGING DOWN PENDENCY IN THE TOP COURT
Since 1950, when the Supreme Court of India replaced the Federal Court after independence from British rule, the tradition has been for judges to decide on cases sitting on a two or more than two-judge benches.
Explaining the Supreme Court practice, senior SC advocate, Sanjay Hegde, said: “Earlier, SC judges used to sit singly only during vacations. And the judge sitting singly only decided matters on an ad interim basis. The final adjudication happened by a bench where judges sat in a combination of two or more judges. It was justice Krishna Iyer, who, sitting singly during vacation, in the Indira Gandhi election case, stayed her disqualification by the Allahabad high court.”
“The object behind the recent move seems to be to reduce the pendency of cases. The rationale of having judges sit in a combination of two or more has been to safeguard against error in administration of justice. Supreme Court being the last court of appeal, it was thought that better to have two or more judges decide an issue finally than a single judge. This [single-judge bench system] is likely to cause some problems,” added Hegde.
Bar Council of India chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra, is critical of the new rules and says the move to have just one judge decide bail and transfer matters is not a healthy practice.
“The Bar, which is an important stakeholder in administration of justice, should at least have been consulted... The idea of having two judges decide a matter was that two heads are better than one. But now this too has been done away. Lower courts and high courts have become conservative while deciding bail/ anticipatory bail matters and SC was the last hope.”