Lawyers express concern to CJI over unprecedented practices in city courts

New Delhi [India], July 4 (ANI): Several lawyers on Thursday gave representation to Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, expressing concern over some unprecedented practices in the district courts and Delhi High Court which granted stay on Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s bail.

Advocates including Sanjeev Nasiar, Balraj Singh Malik and over 100 others wrote to the CJI and expressed concern regarding some unprecedented practices being witnessed in the Delhi High Court and District Courts of Delhi.

The lawyers informed the CJI about an internal administrative order issued by the District Judge of Rouse Avenue Court directing all vacation courts that they would not give any final orders in any matters, and would merely issue notices to regular courts after the vacation.

“Moreover, Hon’ble Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain (Delhi HC judge) should have recused himself from the proceedings since his real brother Sh. Anurag Jain, Advocate is a counsel for the Enforcement Directorate. This clear conflict of interest was never declared by Hon’ble Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain. In fact he passed orders which are clearly irregular and whose delays have been commented upon by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well,” read the representation.

“Not just this, several advocates have complained that soon after the bail order for Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal was passed by Ms. Nyaya Bindu, ASJ an internal administrative order was issued by the District Judge of Rouse Avenue Court directing all Vacation Courts that they would not give any final orders in any matters, and would merely issue notices for regular Courts after the vacation,” it added.

The representation also stated, “Such an order is administratively and procedurally irregular, but also a travesty of justice. The entire purpose of Vacation Courts is that there are urgent matters that require attention even during vacation. If such an administrative order is issued, then it defeats the very purpose of having vacation benches. The timing of the order also raised the question as to whether it was passed after the Rouse Avenue Court granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Sh. Arvind Kejriwal.”

“Such an order is also a direct violation of the spirit of the statements repeatedly made by your good self asking trial courts to make speedy decisions, so as to not clog higher courts. However, giving directions to Vacation Courts not to take decisions is deliberately slowing down the pace of decision making by courts. As a consequence, many lawyers who had cases listed in the vacation have not been able to have final disposal of their matters. We as representatives of the lawyers community would like to lodge a very strong objection against such an administrative order,” it added.

Further it stated, “Many advocates have also expressed their concern that for the first time in the history of the court, judges are not recording the submissions by advocates in their orders. This is extremely unusual and is a practice that requires to be corrected. It is therefore humbly requested to pass directions that the submissions made during the hearing be recorded in front of the lawyers and before the matter is adjourned,” the representation said.

Delhi High Court has stayed Rouse Avenue Court’s order granting bail to state chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in liquor policy case. Delhi HC has allowed ED plea seeking stay on trial court order.