Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, on Tuesday, emphasized that a liberal adjournment system in the Supreme Court would be detrimental to the swift disposal of cases. He was addressing a gathering of judges and lawyers on the occasion of Constitution Day, defending the new rules introduced in February that have significantly reduced the adjournment rate.
CJI Khanna remarked, “I have one request and I hope it will be taken in the right spirit. I am repeatedly receiving requests for re-circulation of adjournment letters… It is not going to be possible for us to return to the previous system. It will be counterproductive.”
Highlighting the change, he noted that under the old system, around 9,000 to 10,000 adjournment letters were received every three months, translating to over 1,000 adjournment requests per day. In contrast, the current system has resulted in only about 1,400 adjournment applications over the past 11 months, averaging around 150 applications a month. He called this a “huge change” in the approach to adjournments.
The new rules were introduced by CJI Khanna’s predecessor, Justice DY Chandrachud, as part of an effort to curb the “adjournment culture,” which has contributed to the massive backlog of cases, now exceeding 80,000. The revised guidelines mandate that adjournment requests must only be circulated once by one party or counsel, with the matters automatically being rescheduled within four weeks.
CJI Khanna also praised lawyers for their essential role in the judicial system, noting that judges come from the bar and return to it. “The better the bar, the better the judges,” he said. “The bar is not only an advocate for the public but also an integral part of the judiciary.”
Further reflecting on Constitution Day, CJI Khanna encouraged introspection about the weaknesses within the system and emphasized the need to address pressing issues.
In his address, Attorney General R. Venkataramani also spoke on the occasion, stating that India does not need external advice but should focus on what can be done collectively to address the nation’s challenges. He highlighted the issue of case pendency in the Supreme Court and questioned whether it should remain a court for all causes or focus solely on constitutional matters, which would help in reducing the backlog.
