SEARCH

News » National

Updated: January 30, 2010 15:30 IST

Supreme Court cannot be in any other part of India: K.G. Balakrishnan

PTI
Comment (11)   ·   print   ·   T  T  
Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan. Photo: V.V. Krishnan
Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan. Photo: V.V. Krishnan

Rejecting the Law Commission’s recommendation for setting up of regional Supreme Court Benches, Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan on Saturday said he did not favour the “disintegration” of the Supreme Court.

“I am not in favour of the disintegration of the Supreme Court. Personally I feel the Supreme Court cannot be in any other part of India. This is the highest court of the land. It is in the capital city of the land,” he said.

The CJI said, “It is a final court and we should maintain the integrity of the Supreme Court.”

More In: National | News

Should the CJ's 'preference' matter more than the learned Law Commission's recommendations, or for that matter, the will of the people ?

In India, the preferences of one man in power can derail the whole system. This is a flaw of our uniquely 'Indian values and culture'.

from:  Nair
Posted on: Feb 12, 2010 at 09:00 IST

Inordinate delay in delivering justice to the people defects the very nature of the judiciary as an institution. People resort to judicial remedy as a last resort for the redressal of their grievanceces and to get justice. Delay in administration of justice in the Supreme Court hits the faith of a common man in judiciary.'Justice delayed is Justice denied'.Therefor setting up of Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court in Delhi and three regional Benches at Chennai/Hyderabad,Kolkatta and Mumbai to deal with appeal from the High Court of respective regions in order to exercise cessative jurisdiction of the apex Court in each of these regions are necessary in this present scenario.

from:  Baheeda.K.B
Posted on: Feb 3, 2010 at 18:55 IST

1. Should there be only one Supreme Court, it can be in any suitable city equally accessible to all. New Delhi is the political capital. Court has nothing to do with politics so it can be somewhere else, in a Judicial capital. It will also help the independence of the Judiciary. 2. India being a big country, there is no harm if the Supreme Court opens up branches in some other cities. Considering the size of India and backlogs, two or three more branch courts will certainly help. The work can even be divided into civil and criminal or further into family and commercial disputes, private and public interest, IP matters etc.

from:  zanu
Posted on: Feb 1, 2010 at 10:23 IST

Supreme Court benches may be established in every High Court.The CJ with the assistance of a few more judges may look into cases of constitutional importance and review the work of the Supreme Court Benches in the High Courts.

from:  wcbabu
Posted on: Jan 31, 2010 at 20:13 IST

I also feel that Supreme Court's integrity should be maintained. Splitting it into different states would increase violation of rules.

from:  Deepankar
Posted on: Jan 31, 2010 at 16:54 IST

Maintaining the integrity would definitely be a concern but that should not stop the highest court of justice from reaching closer to more than a billion people.

from:  Senthil Rajan
Posted on: Jan 31, 2010 at 16:51 IST

India is a vast country. New Delhi is not easily accessiale to a perosn from Kanyakumari, Kutch or Guwahathi. The High Court of Kerala functions from Kochi and not from Trivandrum and similarly UP from Allahabad and not Lucknow. Hence the argument that SCI should function from Capital city is not correct. The state of Tamil Nadu - a fore-runner in social justice system and which leads the rest of the nation had introduced a bench in Madurai a few years back for easy accessibility for the public from southern parts of the state. Madurai bench is functioning successfully. Let us be open and accept reforms and changes. The Hon'ble SCI should have bench in North, East, South and West. Alternatively all matters relating to interpretation of Constitution can be heared at the Head Quarters bench in New Delhi and rest of the matters at extended benches.

from:  Krishnamurthi Ramakrishnan
Posted on: Jan 31, 2010 at 13:13 IST

With devolution of powers right down to the level of Panchayats, it is high time that the Supreme Court should also consider rendering justice to the people at places convenient and nearer to them. It would be difficult for poor people to go Delhi for every case that is heard at the level of the highest court. However, proper checks and balances should be introduced that the integrity of the supreme court is never compromised. In this changing world, I believe there is no need to be dogmatic about any policy. Our constitution says, 'We, the people of India'- so everything should be attuned to people's welfare.

from:  D. Chandramouli
Posted on: Jan 31, 2010 at 09:54 IST

We can as well maintain the integrity of the highest court by having its division/branch in other parts of India. Any rule must be there to follow comfortably instead of violating it easily.

from:  Prakash Reddy Argula
Posted on: Jan 30, 2010 at 17:48 IST

A single court in Delhi is an injustice to the people of this land.

from:  Krishna
Posted on: Jan 30, 2010 at 17:45 IST

Sir
I feel that Supreme Court should be only in Delhi. Move to setup SC Benches in different parts of the country is fraught with danger as it will severly compromise the integrity of the highest court of the land.
There are different ways to counter the problem of rising nummber of backlog of cases in the country.

from:  Manoj Kumar
Posted on: Jan 30, 2010 at 16:08 IST
Show all comments
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Swachh Bharat Mission

Tweet your opinions with #THCleanIndia. Take a look at how the mission has taken shape. Read more»

International

Tamil Nadu

Andhra Pradesh

Karnataka

Kerala


O
P
E
N

close

Recent Article in National

Top cruciverbalists to cross swords in Dec. 21 finale

Indian Crossword League 2014, opened to NRIs and PIOs, saw significant rise in participation »