Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud on Friday said that no case is too small for the Supreme Court and that lack of intervention in matters of personal liberty can lead to “serious miscarriage of justice”. His comments came two days after Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju’s statement in the Rajya Sabha suggested the apex court avoid hearing bail pleas and “frivolous PILs” to deal with the backlog of cases.
“No case is too small for the Supreme Court and no case is too big because we must answer the call of conscience and the call for freedom of our citizens. That’s why we’re here, and these are not one-off cases. If we don’t act on matters of personal liberty and give relief, then what are we doing here?” the CJI observed as he presided over a bench of Justice PS Narasimha hearing a case related to an Uttar Pradesh man, Iqram, sentenced to two years in prison for electricity theft.
On Wednesday, Rijiju told Parliament that the apex court should hear only constitutional matters instead of bail applications to avoid a high caseload. He was also at odds with the Supreme Court on judicial appointments, favoring the National Judicial Appointments Commission, a proposed government body to replace the collegial system of judicial recruitment. In 2015, the Supreme Court overturned it and called it unconstitutional.
The Union Minister also noted that the courts are taking long vacations which are inconvenient for the justice seekers. “There is a feeling among the people of India that the long vacation given to the courts is not very convenient for the justice seekers,” he said. The Supreme Court sets up vacation benches to hear cases during summer breaks, but such benches are not used during winter vacations.
Likewise, the CJI announced that the court will not have vacation benches between December 19, 2022 and January 2, 2023 during this winter break. CJI Chandrachud further said that a case like theft of electricity cannot be elevated to a case of murder. The court would be failing in its duty under Article 136 of the Constitution if it did not intervene whenever there was a miscarriage of justice, he added.”The intervention of this court to protect the freedom of citizens is based on sound constitutional principles enshrined in Article 136 of the Constitution. The right to personal liberty is a rare and inalienable right recognized by the Constitution,” he said. Article 136 allows the Supreme Court to appeal against the judgments of any court or tribunal in the country.
