The Court emphasized the importance of employing judicial discretion when dismissing stay orders, while also recognizing the drawbacks associated with such actions. A Constitution bench received the Supreme Court’s verdict in the case of Asian Resurfacing Of Road Agency v. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Friday.
In a 2018 ruling, a three-judge Supreme Court panel established that all stay orders in both criminal and civil cases would have a maximum validity of six months, unless explicitly extended. Recently, the Court has expressed reservations regarding this stance.
While acknowledging the disadvantages of extending stay orders, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra also emphasized the necessity of judicial discretion when lifting such orders.
“We have reservations about the general formulation mentioned above. While it is undeniable that an extended stay can unnecessarily delay the trial, it is crucial to consider the possibility that the court’s inability to expedite proceedings may also contribute to the delay. Therefore, the rule stipulating the automatic dismissal of a stay order would potentially result in a serious injustice, as it would abruptly terminate a stay without judicial intervention,” the Court stated. Consequently, the Court referred the matter to a larger bench of five judges, as the decision in the Asian Resurfacing case had been rendered by three judges.
Furthermore, the Court has invited Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta or Attorney General R Venkataramani to provide assistance in this matter.
