SC refuses to entertain PIL looking for uniform judicial code, phrases in courts throughout nation

By PTI

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a PIL looking for implementation of a uniform judicial code in courts throughout the nation on points comparable to case registration, use of frequent judicial phrases, phrases and abbreviations of authorized phrases.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umessh Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat referred to an earlier assembly of the chief ministers and the chief justices of all excessive courts and stated although, the matter was mentioned, however all excessive courts refused to implement it.

“You know that there was a meeting between the chief ministers and the chief justices here a few years ago. Resolutions were made and some courts implemented it and other high courts refused to implement it,” the bench stated.

Referring to make use of of various judicial phrases for a similar factor, it stated in Delhi, the time period letter patent enchantment (LPA) is used for an intra-court enchantment and another excessive courtroom makes use of “first appeal”.

“Can we agree on a page limit for a SLP (special leave petition) or for a list of dates that should not be more than four pages and synopsis should not be more than three paragraphs. Can we make a judicial order for this,” it stated, including that it was very good because the idea.

“You better withdraw this,” the bench stated, which led lawyer petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay to withdraw the PIL.

The PIL sought instructions to the excessive courts to take applicable steps to “adopt uniform procedure for case registration, use common judicial terms, phrases and abbreviations and make the court fee uniform”.

The plea, alternatively, sought a course to the Law Commission to arrange a report in session with the excessive courts with a view to make judicial phrases, phrases, abbreviations, case registration and courtroom charge uniform.

The plea tried to inculcate a comparability of the phrases, phrases and codes used within the benches of the Allahabad High Court and located large distinction in terminology utilized by the 2 benches of the identical excessive courtroom.

“It is noteworthy that such differences in terminology can be seen in all the high courts. All the 25 high courts across the country have different usage of the phrases when it comes to identifying different cases,” it stated.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a PIL looking for implementation of a uniform judicial code in courts throughout the nation on points comparable to case registration, use of frequent judicial phrases, phrases and abbreviations of authorized phrases.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umessh Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat referred to an earlier assembly of the chief ministers and the chief justices of all excessive courts and stated although, the matter was mentioned, however all excessive courts refused to implement it.

“You know that there was a meeting between the chief ministers and the chief justices here a few years ago. Resolutions were made and some courts implemented it and other high courts refused to implement it,” the bench stated.

Referring to make use of of various judicial phrases for a similar factor, it stated in Delhi, the time period letter patent enchantment (LPA) is used for an intra-court enchantment and another excessive courtroom makes use of “first appeal”.

“Can we agree on a page limit for a SLP (special leave petition) or for a list of dates that should not be more than four pages and synopsis should not be more than three paragraphs. Can we make a judicial order for this,” it stated, including that it was very good because the idea.

“You better withdraw this,” the bench stated, which led lawyer petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay to withdraw the PIL.

The PIL sought instructions to the excessive courts to take applicable steps to “adopt uniform procedure for case registration, use common judicial terms, phrases and abbreviations and make the court fee uniform”.

The plea, alternatively, sought a course to the Law Commission to arrange a report in session with the excessive courts with a view to make judicial phrases, phrases, abbreviations, case registration and courtroom charge uniform.

The plea tried to inculcate a comparability of the phrases, phrases and codes used within the benches of the Allahabad High Court and located large distinction in terminology utilized by the 2 benches of the identical excessive courtroom.

“It is noteworthy that such differences in terminology can be seen in all the high courts. All the 25 high courts across the country have different usage of the phrases when it comes to identifying different cases,” it stated.