The Supreme Court on Monday announced plans to create clear rules about when government officials can be summoned to court. This comes after the central government submitted its proposal to the courts to deal with government-related issues.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud said it wanted to clear the atmosphere by setting common standards for summoning government officials to court.
The Supreme Court also said it would distinguish between cases that are still pending and those that have been resolved. They mentioned that while it may be necessary to call government officials when there is a problem in resolved cases, it may not be necessary in ongoing cases. "We're going to develop some guidelines for summoning officers. You should separate cases that are pending before the court and those that have already taken place. In pending cases, summoning practice may not be necessary. In cases that have already been tried, of course, contempt may arise. We will also impose restraint measures," CJI said. This discussion arose in a case where the central government proposed some regulations on how government officials should appear in court when the case involved the government.
The court said it would focus only on how officers should appear in court, including their dress code. They talk about officers sometimes wearing casual clothes for personal work, but wearing formal uniforms when traveling on business.
"I handled Army and Navy business. While personal business officials wear casual attire, for official work they wear formal attire," CJI said. Recently, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta made recommendations on how to handle court cases involving the government. These comments include that government officials should be asked to appear in court only when absolutely necessary, not always.
Consistent with the recommendations, courts should exercise appropriate restraint when summoning government officials to hearings, especially in contempt cases.
Furthermore, he suggested that judges should ideally refrain from presiding over contempt proceedings involving their own orders and that the courts should not insist on enforcing orders that lead to them. to concrete results, especially in matters of the executive branch.
In addition, the SOP advises against filing a contempt lawsuit when an attorney for the government makes statements in court that contradict the government's position as confirmed by affidavits, written statements, and affidavits. copies or responses filed with the court.
