Latest news with #SupremeCourtRules
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
‘The mere pendency of any appeal, revision, or constitutional petition does not, of itself, stay the execution or implementation of the order impugned': SC
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court clarified that mere pendency of any appeal, revision, or constitutional petition does not, of itself, stay the execution or implementation of the order impugned. A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, ruled that while hearing the petitions of Chief Land Commissioner and Punjab/ Senior Member Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore against the Lahore High Court (LHC)'s order. The same bench, in dismissal of the application for pre-arrest bail by the LHC on 19.11.2024, maintained; 'Prompt and faithful enforcement of judicial orders is fundamental to the criminal justice system. Once pre-arrest bail is declined by a competent court of law and the accused stands exposed to arrest in accordance with law.' Both the judgments were authored by Yahya Afridi. In revenue department case, the judgment noted that the LHC over a decade ago directed revenue authorities to re-decide the matter in accordance with law. Despite such clear directions, the Deputy Land Commissioner, Bahawalpur, failed to act, resulting in unreasonable and unexplained delay. The judgment said when superior courts issue remand directions, they are to be complied with faithfully and expeditiously. Such failure is contrary to the constitutional duty of all authorities to act in aid of judicial orders. It clarified; 'The mere pendency of any appeal, revision, or constitutional petition does not, of itself, stay the execution or implementation of the order impugned. This principle is expressly embodied in Order XX Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980. The judgment noted that in Rashid Baig vs. Muhammad Mansha (2024 SCMR 1385) the apex court made it clear; 'that mere pendency of a petition before this Court does not, by itself, operate as a stay of proceedings, which may only be lawfully restrained by an express injunctive order of the Court. Thus, administrative inaction premised on the mere pendency of further proceedings, without any lawful restraint, is both unjustified and impermissible.' The judgment said regrettable that despite the clear pronouncement of this Court in Rashid Baig's case expressing disapproval of such misuse of procedural pendency, the same practice continues unabated. This reflects not merely individual lapses, but a persistent pattern of administrative disregard for binding remand orders, which in itself constitutes systemic failure requiring urgent redress. The judgment reiterated that failure by the relevant authorities to observe established principles requiring prompt compliance with remand orders would frustrate the administration of justice and violate their constitutional duty. In dismissal of pre-arrest bail case, the Supreme Court clarified that any practice whereby police authorities treat the mere filing of a petition before the Supreme Court as an implied stay or bar to arrest, despite the dismissal of pre-arrest bail, indicates a misunderstanding of the purpose of pre-arrest bail. This relief exists as an exceptional measure to protect individuals against arbitrary or malafide arrest, where circumstances clearly warrant such protection. Once a competent court has declined pre-arrest bail, it has necessarily determined that no such exceptional circumstances exist and arrest is lawful and necessary to ensure an effective investigation. Allowing the mere act of filing another petition to operate as a de facto stay would render that judicial determination meaningless, defeat the objective of ensuring prompt and fair investigation, and risk abuse of process by enabling accused persons to indefinitely evade arrest without any legal basis. Therefore, judicial orders must remain binding and enforceable unless and until a competent court expressly orders otherwise. It must be remembered that interim protection is not automatic; it must be specifically sought and expressly granted. Absent such an order, a refusal of bail remains fully operative and must be implemented promptly and in good faith by investigating authorities. The Court said the practice of delaying or avoiding arrest on the pretext of a pending petition raises serious concerns, as it essentially frustrates and weakens ongoing investigations and undermines the authority and finality of judicial orders. In addition, such a practice risks promoting a culture of impunity, enabling accused persons to evade the process of law by exploiting systemic inaction. The judgment said that investigating officers and police authorities are legally bound to act upon court orders dismissing pre-arrest bail immediately, without waiting for further instructions or presuming the existence of any stay where none has been granted. Administrative convenience, internal practice, or mere pendency of higher-forum proceedings cannot justify or excuse failure to act in accordance with law. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
India Gazette
26-06-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
SC notifies guidelines for retention, disposal of records
New Delhi [India], June 26 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Thursday highlighted a lacuna over the management of administrative records and issued guidelines for retention and disposal of documents to create accountability and efficiency across all registry wings. Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, in a message, said that over the years, the registry of the Supreme Court has witnessed a significant increase in the volume and diversity of administrative records generated across multiple branches. CJI said, 'While judicial records pertaining to case proceedings are governed by explicit provisions contained in Order LVI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, and further elaborated in Chapter XXI of the Handbook on Practice and Office Procedure of the Supreme Court of India, 2017, a lacuna has persisted with respect to the management of administrative records.' He further added, 'This disparity leads to inconsistent practices across branches, affecting archival clarity and efficiency. The 'Guidelines for Retention and Destruction of Records 2025' aim to remedy this by promoting coherence, accountability, and efficiency in managing administrative records, including institutional decisions, policy implementations, inter-departmental correspondences, audits, and engagements with external stakeholders.' He underscored the importance of properly managing these records for transparency and accountability, and guidelines to establish a rational framework. Operational efficiency is enhanced by the systematic elimination of obsolete documents, easing storage burdens and improving record retrieval speed, said the CJI. 'The Guidelines ensure compliance with audit and statutory obligations by defining appropriate retention periods based on fiscal, legal, and administrative relevance. They are aligned with national public record management standards,' he further continued. The guidelines were stated to have been borne out of detailed consultations among Registrars and officials of the Registry. As per the issued guidelines, original submission notes or paper books bearing signatures of the Chief Justice of India and judges of the Supreme Court are to be preserved permanently. Policy files, office orders and circular files were to be preserved permanently. In case the records of one branch or wing were correlated with those of a different branch or records relating to the confidential branch, an intimation on 'the pendency of court case is to be sent to them as soon as the court case is received in the section', it said. Destruction and retention of records by the relevant branches should be carried out after due approval from the registrar concerned, it further said. (ANI)
Economic Times
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Economic Times
SC issues guidelines for retention, disposal of records
Supreme Court of India Synopsis The Supreme Court of India has introduced new guidelines, effective 2025, for managing administrative records to enhance accountability and efficiency. Chief Justice Gavai highlighted the need to address inconsistencies in record management across different branches. The Supreme Court on Thursday issued guidelines for retention and disposal of documents to create accountability and efficiency across all registry wings. ADVERTISEMENT The top court highlighted a lacuna over the management of administrative records. In a message, Chief Justice of India B R Gavai said over the years, the registry of the Supreme Court has witnessed a significant increase in the volume and diversity of administrative records generated across multiple branches. "While judicial records pertaining to case proceedings are governed by explicit provisions contained in Order LVI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, and further elaborated in Chapter XXI of the Handbook on Practice and Office Procedure of the Supreme Court of India, 2017, a lacuna has persisted with respect to the management of administrative records," he said. The CJI continued, "This disparity leads to inconsistent practices across branches, affecting archival clarity and efficiency. The 'Guidelines for Retention and Destruction of Records 2025' aim to remedy this by promoting coherence, accountability, and efficiency in managing administrative records, including institutional decisions, policy implementations, inter-departmental correspondences, audits, and engagements with external stakeholders." CJI Gavai underscored the importance of properly managing these records for transparency and accountability and guidelines to establish a rational framework. ADVERTISEMENT "Operational efficiency is enhanced by the systematic elimination of obsolete documents, easing storage burdens and improving record retrieval speed. The Guidelines ensure compliance with audit and statutory obligations by defining appropriate retention periods based on fiscal, legal, an administrative relevance. They are aligned with national public record management standards." The guidelines were stated to have borne out of detailed consultations among registrars and officials of the registry. ADVERTISEMENT "I place on record my sincere appreciation for the efforts of Pradip Y. Ladekar, Registrar at the Supreme Court, who played the instrumental role in drafting these Guidelines. He was ably supported by his staff members throughout the process. I also appreciate Bharat Parashar, Secretary General, and S C Munghate, Officer on Special Duty (in the rank of Secretary General), for their leadership and guidance in steering the Registry through this important initiative," he said. According to the issued guidelines, original submission notes or paper books bearing signatures of the chief justice of India and judges of the Supreme Court to be preserved permanently. ADVERTISEMENT Further, policy files, office orders and circular files were to be preserved permanently. "The retention period of the records shall start after the final action or disposal of arbitration, litigation, enquiry or audit as the case may be. All the branches concerned, before destroying files/cases/records will ensure that no court case is pending in respect of the subject matter of the files/cases/records being destroyed/ weeded out," it said. ADVERTISEMENT In case the records of one branch or wing were co-related with those a different branch or records relating to the confidential branch, an intimation on "the pendency of court case is to be sent to them as soon as the court case is received in the section". Destruction and retention of records by the relevant branches should be carried out after due approval from the registrar concerned, it added. "The exercise of destruction of record normally be carried out during summer vacation/partial court working days. In case a scanned copy of documents/records is to be preserved beyond the retention period for the reasons to be recorded in writing decision may be taken by the concerned Registrar at the time of destruction of the record(s)," the guidelines said. It added, "Financial and budget-related documents and files should be maintained separately for each financial year with effect from April 1 to March 31. All other records, registers may be maintained separately for each calendar year, i.e., January 1 to December 31." (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) (Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.) Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online. NEXT STORY
The Hindu
26-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Supreme Court issues guidelines for retention, disposal of records
The Supreme Court on Thursday (June 26, 2025) issued guidelines for the retention and disposal of documents to create accountability and efficiency across all registry wings. The top court highlighted a lacuna over the management of administrative records. In a message, Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai said that over the years, the registry of the Supreme Court has witnessed a significant increase in the volume and diversity of administrative records generated across multiple branches. "While judicial records pertaining to case proceedings are governed by explicit provisions contained in Order LVI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, and further elaborated in Chapter XXI of the Handbook on Practice and Office Procedure of the Supreme Court of India, 2017, a lacuna has persisted with respect to the management of administrative records," he said. The CJI continued, "This disparity leads to inconsistent practices across branches, affecting archival clarity and efficiency. The 'Guidelines for Retention and Destruction of Records 2025' aim to remedy this by promoting coherence, accountability, and efficiency in managing administrative records, including institutional decisions, policy implementations, inter-departmental correspondences, audits, and engagements with external stakeholders." CJI Gavai underscored the importance of properly managing these records for transparency and accountability and guidelines to establish a rational framework. "Operational efficiency is enhanced by the systematic elimination of obsolete documents, easing storage burdens and improving record retrieval speed. The Guidelines ensure compliance with audit and statutory obligations by defining appropriate retention periods based on fiscal, legal, and administrative relevance. They are aligned with national public record management standards." The guidelines were stated to have borne out of detailed consultations among registrars and officials of the registry. "I place on record my sincere appreciation for the efforts of Pradip Y. Ladekar, Registrar at the Supreme Court, who played the instrumental role in drafting these Guidelines. He was ably supported by his staff members throughout the process. I also appreciate Bharat Parashar, Secretary General, and S C Munghate, Officer on Special Duty (in the rank of Secretary General), for their leadership and guidance in steering the Registry through this important initiative," he said. According to the issued guidelines, original submission notes or paper books bearing signatures of the chief justice of India and judges of the Supreme Court to be preserved permanently. Further, policy files, office orders and circular files were to be preserved permanently. "The retention period of the records shall start after the final action or disposal of arbitration, litigation, enquiry or audit as the case may be. All the branches concerned, before destroying files/cases/records will ensure that no court case is pending in respect of the subject matter of the files/cases/records being destroyed/ weeded out," it said. In case the records of one branch or wing were co-related with those a different branch or records relating to the confidential branch, an intimation on "the pendency of court case is to be sent to them as soon as the court case is received in the section". Destruction and retention of records by the relevant branches should be carried out after due approval from the registrar concerned, it added. "The exercise of destruction of record normally be carried out during summer vacation/partial court working days. In case a scanned copy of documents/records is to be preserved beyond the retention period for the reasons to be recorded in writing decision may be taken by the concerned Registrar at the time of destruction of the record(s)," the guidelines said. It added, "Financial and budget-related documents and files should be maintained separately for each financial year with effect from April 1 to March 31. All other records, registers may be maintained separately for each calendar year, i.e., January 1 to December 31."
Time of India
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
SC issues guidelines for retention, disposal of records
The Supreme Court of India has introduced new guidelines, effective 2025, for managing administrative records to enhance accountability and efficiency. Chief Justice Gavai highlighted the need to address inconsistencies in record management across different branches. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Supreme Court on Thursday issued guidelines for retention and disposal of documents to create accountability and efficiency across all registry top court highlighted a lacuna over the management of administrative a message, Chief Justice of India B R Gavai said over the years, the registry of the Supreme Court has witnessed a significant increase in the volume and diversity of administrative records generated across multiple branches."While judicial records pertaining to case proceedings are governed by explicit provisions contained in Order LVI of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, and further elaborated in Chapter XXI of the Handbook on Practice and Office Procedure of the Supreme Court of India, 2017, a lacuna has persisted with respect to the management of administrative records," he CJI continued, "This disparity leads to inconsistent practices across branches, affecting archival clarity and efficiency. The 'Guidelines for Retention and Destruction of Records 2025' aim to remedy this by promoting coherence, accountability, and efficiency in managing administrative records, including institutional decisions, policy implementations, inter-departmental correspondences, audits, and engagements with external stakeholders."CJI Gavai underscored the importance of properly managing these records for transparency and accountability and guidelines to establish a rational framework."Operational efficiency is enhanced by the systematic elimination of obsolete documents, easing storage burdens and improving record retrieval speed. The Guidelines ensure compliance with audit and statutory obligations by defining appropriate retention periods based on fiscal, legal, an administrative relevance. They are aligned with national public record management standards."The guidelines were stated to have borne out of detailed consultations among registrars and officials of the registry."I place on record my sincere appreciation for the efforts of Pradip Y. Ladekar, Registrar at the Supreme Court, who played the instrumental role in drafting these Guidelines. He was ably supported by his staff members throughout the process. I also appreciate Bharat Parashar, Secretary General, and S C Munghate, Officer on Special Duty (in the rank of Secretary General), for their leadership and guidance in steering the Registry through this important initiative," he to the issued guidelines, original submission notes or paper books bearing signatures of the chief justice of India and judges of the Supreme Court to be preserved policy files, office orders and circular files were to be preserved permanently."The retention period of the records shall start after the final action or disposal of arbitration, litigation, enquiry or audit as the case may be. All the branches concerned, before destroying files/cases/records will ensure that no court case is pending in respect of the subject matter of the files/cases/records being destroyed/ weeded out," it case the records of one branch or wing were co-related with those a different branch or records relating to the confidential branch, an intimation on "the pendency of court case is to be sent to them as soon as the court case is received in the section".Destruction and retention of records by the relevant branches should be carried out after due approval from the registrar concerned, it added."The exercise of destruction of record normally be carried out during summer vacation/partial court working days. In case a scanned copy of documents/records is to be preserved beyond the retention period for the reasons to be recorded in writing decision may be taken by the concerned Registrar at the time of destruction of the record(s)," the guidelines added, "Financial and budget-related documents and files should be maintained separately for each financial year with effect from April 1 to March 31. All other records, registers may be maintained separately for each calendar year, i.e., January 1 to December 31."
