In a significant move, the Supreme Court has proffered comprehensive guidelines to High Courts, urging prudence in summoning government officials. The court, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, crafted a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to curb arbitrary and frequent summoning of officials.
Under the newly instituted SOP, personal presence is deemed essential only in evidence-based adjudication, summary proceedings, and non-adversarial cases where the court requires assistance on complex policy matters. The court emphasized that personal appearances should not be directed routinely if issues can be adequately addressed through affidavits and documents.
Crucially, the SOP dictates that the court should avoid directing the presence of an official solely based on a divergence of views between the official’s affidavit and the court’s stance. Instead, efforts should be made to resolve such matters through existing records.
The court also emphasized the use of video conferencing as the first option for officials’ appearances in exceptional cases where in-person presence is deemed necessary. Invitational links for video conferencing must be sent in advance, and due notice with reasons should be provided for in-person appearances.
Furthermore, the court outlined guidelines to maintain a respectful environment during proceedings. It stressed the avoidance of oral remarks that could potentially humiliate officials, refraining from commenting on their physical appearance, education, or social standing. Courts were advised against making comments on the attire of officials unless there is a violation of specified dress codes.
The Supreme Court underscored the need for professionalism and respect in the courtroom, urging courts to consider the complexities of decision-making before specifying timelines for compliance with orders. It also suggested that contempt proceedings should be initiated cautiously and with restraint.
These directives came as the Supreme Court set aside a previous order from the Allahabad High Court that sought the custody of two Secretaries of the Uttar Pradesh Government for alleged non-compliance with directions regarding facilities for retired judges.
Notably, the impetus for these guidelines came from a request by Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta during a hearing. The CJI, in agreement, framed the SOP, addressing concerns raised in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Association of Retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges. Last year, the Supreme Court had stayed an order of the Allahabad High Court, which led to the custody of government officials over non-compliance issues.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
