SC pulls up lawyer seeking adjournment, says pending cases stand at 90,000

A two-judge bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan admonished the lawyer representing the Karnataka government after she asked for time to seek instructions in a criminal matter

The Supreme Court on Tuesday censured the practice of lawyers seeking adjournments to obtain instructions from their clients, noting that such conduct contributes to the court’s mounting pendency, which now stands at about 90,000 cases, LiveLaw reported.

 

A two-judge bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan admonished the lawyer representing the Karnataka government after she asked for additional time to seek instructions in a criminal matter involving allegations of trespassing and theft of coffee beans.

 

Justice Nagarathna said, "Whenever we ask a question, learned counsel will say I have to seek instructions. That's how matters are getting adjourned. The pendency of this court is 90,000. Who is responsible for it? It will cross a lakh."

 

The court made these remarks while hearing a plea filed by three sisters seeking discharge in connection with a criminal case of alleged trespassing into a coffee estate and removing harvested beans.

 

During the proceedings, the state government's counsel requested time to examine the records and seek instructions on basic queries raised by the bench about the recovery memo. This led Justice Nagarathna to note that the court was already dealing with a pendency of 90,000 cases. She further said adjournments are likely to benefit the advocates and not the litigants. Counsel, she said, should receive instructions as soon as the cause list is published, especially now that electronic communication and video conferencing are easily available.

 

Justice Nagarathna expressed dissatisfaction with the assistance that the Karnataka government provided, adding, "This is not the kind of assistance we should get from the counsels or standing counsel of the State or whoever it is. We asked a simple question – what is the stand of your party…”

 

Case background

 

The case stems from the allegations levelled against the three sisters, who are accused of trespassing into a coffee estate on December 23, 2014. According to the report, the three sisters harvested coffee beans by threatening the staff of the coffee plantation and transporting them in a lorry.

 

The accused sisters are currently facing charges under Sections 447 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Karnataka High Court had declined to discharge them, noting that eyewitnesses had been cited and that their claim of alibi was an issue to be tested during trial.

 

Before the apex court, counsel for the petitioners suggested that the dispute could be resolved through mediation. Justice Nagarathna raised questions about the allegation that the accused had removed 10,000 kg of coffee. The petitioners’ lawyer responded that although such an allegation was made, only 10 leaves had been seized. When the bench asked what became of the coffee beans and how they were transported, the lawyer said that no beans had been recovered and no transporter had been identified or detained.

 

The matter was later referred for mediation.

 

The apex court has often flagged concerns over rising pendency and delays caused due to unnecessary adjournments. In 2021, the top court observed that the "adjournment culture" breaks litigants and hence should not be encouraged.

 

In 2023, it noted that the prolonged pendency erodes public confidence and directed high courts to expedite cases, particularly those pending for years. Earlier this May, the Court said that matters involving personal liberty cannot be allowed to languish, pointing to a case that had been adjourned 27 times. In September, it instructed high courts and trial courts to dispose of bail and anticipatory bail pleas without undue delay, stressing that such applications cannot remain pending for years.