Supreme Court

SC Rules Stay Trial Court or High Court Can not Vacate Automatically

FacebookFacebookTwitterTwitterEmailEmailWhatsAppWhatsAppLinkedInLinkedInShareShare

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that stay orders granted by lower or higher courts in civil and criminal cases cannot automatically lapse after six months. Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, leading a five-judge Constitution Bench, disagreed with a previous 2018 ruling that mandated the automatic vacation of such stay orders unless explicitly extended.

Providing guidance, the judgment emphasized that constitutional courts, including the Supreme Court and high courts, should refrain from setting deadlines for case disposal, reserving such actions for exceptional circumstances.

The Bench delivered two separate but concurring judgments. Justice A S Oka stated, “Constitutional courts should refrain from setting timelines for case decisions, as the specific circumstances of each case are best understood by the concerned courts.” He added, “There should be no automatic vacation of stay orders,” echoing the sentiments of himself, the Chief Justice, and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.

Justice Pankaj Mithal penned a separate yet concurring opinion in the matter.

The Supreme Court had reserved its decision on December 13, 2023, after hearing arguments from senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the High Court Bar Association of Allahabad, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, and other attorneys.

Previously, on December 1 of the preceding year, the Supreme Court had referred its 2018 ruling to a five-judge bench for reconsideration. This earlier ruling had stipulated that stay orders granted by lower or higher courts would automatically expire after six months unless specifically extended.

The 2018 verdict, issued in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency P Ltd Director Vs CBI by a three-judge bench, mandated the automatic vacation of interim stay orders unless explicitly extended, leading to no trial or proceedings remaining stayed beyond six months. However, the Supreme Court later clarified that this judgment would not apply if the stay order originated from itself.

FacebookFacebookTwitterTwitterEmailEmailWhatsAppWhatsAppLinkedInLinkedInShareShare
AddThis Website Tools
Ashish Sinha

-Ashish Kumar Sinha -Editor Legally Speaking -Ram Nath Goenka awardee - 14 Years of Experience in Media - Covering Courts Since 2008

Recent Posts

Bombay HC Rejects Bail To ‘JeM Operative’ Accused Of Conducting Recce Of Hedgewar Memorial

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court on Friday rejected the bail plea of…

22 minutes ago

ED Case: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Unitech’s Ramesh Chandra

In a significant development, the Delhi High Court on Friday granted bail to Ramesh Chandra,…

41 minutes ago

Cash Recovery Senior Lawyer Mentions Incident Before Delhi High Court Expresses Pain Over Incident

A senior lawyer on Friday expressed deep shock and pain before the Delhi High Court…

1 hour ago

“Wife’s Watching Porn, Self-Pleasure Not Cruelty”: Madras HC Turns Down Husband’s Divorce Plea

The Madras High Court rejected man's request for divorce, dismissing his claims that his wife’s…

19 hours ago

Delhi Riots Case: Delhi HC Lists Tasleem Ahmed’s Bail Plea Before Roster Bench

The Delhi High Court has scheduled the bail plea of Tasleem Ahmed for hearing before…

19 hours ago

Omar Abdullah Announces New Assembly, Salary Hike, Final Amnesty & Heritage Push For J&K

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah made several significant announcements on Thursday during the…

19 hours ago