‘Don’t adjourn graft trials at the drop of a hat’

The court regretted “what was a mere disturbance once has now become a disorder, a diseased one.”

Expressing anguish at protracted trials in corruption cases, the Supreme Court on Wednesday directed all the trial courts to speed up such proceedings and refrain from granting adjournments “at the drop of a hat”.

The court regretted “what was a mere disturbance once has now become a disorder, a diseased one.”

“The duty of the court is to see that not only the interest of the accused as per law is protected, but also the societal and collective interest is safe-guarded. It is distressing to note that despite series of judgments of this Court, the habit of granting adjournment, really an ailment, continues. How long shall we say, “Awake! Arise!” There is a constant discomfort,” said a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Rohinton F Nariman.

Story continues below this ad

The bench directed that its order should be sent to chief justices of all the High Courts for circulating it among the trial judges with a command to follow the principles relating to trial in a requisite manner and not to defer the cross-examination of a witness at their pleasure or at the leisure of the defence counsel.

“For, it eventually makes the trial an apology for trial and compels the whole society to suffer chicanery. Let it be remembered that law cannot allowed to be lonely, a destitute,” said the bench.

The order came as it heard an appeal by a person, who while working as an octroi inspector in Punjab had received a bribe and was sentenced in 2001 to two years in jail in the corruption case. Perusing the trial records, the court noted that a prime witness in the case was cross-examined after a year and eight months, allowing ample time to pressurise the witness and to gain over him by adopting all kinds of tactics.

“If an accused for his benefit takes the trial on the path of total mockery, it cannot be countenanced. The Court has a sacred duty to see that the trial is conducted as per law. If adjournments are granted in this manner it would tantamount to violation of rule of law and eventually turn such trials to a farce. It is legally impermissible and jurisprudentially abominable,” said the bench.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram