Registry’s Functioning Requires Deeper Probe; Some Officers Suppose They Final In SC Extra Than Judges & Can Do No matter : CJI

The Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, right this moment expressed considerations over the workings of the Registry and hinted at endeavor a ‘deeper probe’ as to how related issues have been being listed earlier than completely different benches.

He mentioned that he’ll take steps to reform the Registry throughout his time period.

The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi was listening to the writ petition difficult the UP Gangsters Act and elevating the difficulty of it being repugnant to the definition of “organised crime” below the central legislation, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

Extra Solicitor Normal KM Nataraj, for the State of Uttar Pradesh, then knowledgeable the bench that in 2022, a 3-judge bench had refused to entertain a problem to the UP Gangsters Act in Md. Anas Chaudhary v. State of Uttar Pradesh WP (Crl) 492/2022.

Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam, for the petitioner, then knowledgeable {that a} division bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan is presently seized of one other matter(Siraj Ahmad Khan v State of UP) on the difficulty of repugnancy between varied provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Actions (Prevention) Act, 1986 (UP Gangster Act), and Part 111(organised crime) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The counsel for the petitioner requested the bench to tag the current matter with the pending one earlier than the bench of Justice Pardiwala. Alam mentioned that the two-judge bench has listed the matter for listening to to look at the difficulty of repugnancy, and it was part-heard earlier.

The CJI took a stern view of how related issues have been getting listed earlier than completely different benches. He mentioned : “The system of divding Supreme Courtroom into benches may be very disturbing…I want to study on the executive aspect of how issues have moved and the way it’s listed now.”

The ASG prompt that the matter earlier than the two-judge bench could be introduced earlier than the CJI’s bench by tagging it with the current matter. Alam replied that it was “an unfair submission”.

The ASG mentioned that the Union and different States, which have made legal guidelines on organised crimes, needs to be heard within the matter. “Let all of the matter come earlier than this bench,” ASG mentioned. Refuting this, Alam mentioned, “That is once more an unfair assertion. The matter earlier than the two-judge bench is part-heard and the identical plea was taken there.”

The CJI then mentioned, “Do not doubt the facility of the Chief Justice”, indicating that as grasp of the roster, he has the facility to assign circumstances.

Alam then sought to withdraw the petition. “Below the circumstances, enable me to withdraw”.

“No, no query of withdrawal,” CJI refused to permit him to withdraw, including that the matter required a deeper probe. He mentioned :

“The matter requires a deeper probe…it is concerning the functioning of the Registry of this Courtroom. The most important problem earlier than me is the Registry of this Courtroom, so I’ve to carry a deeper probe into that affair…that how the matter, after one bench expressed last opinion, how the issues journey to the opposite bench, what’s that mechanism they’re utilizing …we’re discovering this on each day now…”

Alam mentioned that the Courtroom wants to look at this problem.

Referring to a current criticism relating to the Registry, the CJI additional expressed that officers throughout the Registry handled judges as in the event that they have been in a ‘transit stage’.

“Regardless of the mechanism that I’ve created, regardless of that factor being past management…final week I had a criticism, I used to be practically shocked to seek out out what is occurring within the Registry of this Courtroom. There are workers/ officers who assume they’re right here for 20 years or 30 years – the choose will go most until 8 years, so that they assume all of us are right here for a transit stage, we come and go, they’re the everlasting folks, and subsequently issues should occur as they need. That’s what is bothering me, and If I’m not capable of deliver this reform earlier than I demit workplace, then it will likely be a failure in my obligation.”

The matter will now be heard on March 25.

Case Particulars : IRFAN SOLANKI vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH| W.P.(Crl.) No. 000084 / 2026