In a candid address at the Supreme Court Bar Association’s National Conference in Bengaluru, Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan emphasized the need for the judiciary to maintain neutrality, warning against it becoming either an “eternal critic” or a “cheerleader” of the government. Speaking on “The Role of Judiciary in Viksit Bharat” (Developed India), Justice Bhuyan highlighted a pervasive “more loyal than the king” syndrome among some judges, which he said contributes to hesitancy in granting bail and results in prolonged incarceration for undertrials. He criticized the reckless filing of First Information Reports (FIRs) for minor issues, such as student protests, memes, and social media posts, which often escalate to the Supreme Court and consume valuable judicial time. The judge pointed out that this trend not only burdens the system but also raises serious concerns about personal liberties, as individuals languish in jails without timely trials.
Justice Bhuyan further decried the overuse of stringent laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), citing alarming statistics: as of March 2025, 7,771 Enforcement Case Information Reports (ECIRs) were filed under PMLA, leading to 1,031 arrests, yet trials concluded in only 47 cases with a conviction rate below 5%. He questioned the justification for detaining people for years when the maximum sentence under such laws is often just seven years, arguing that flimsy evidence frequently fails in court, leading to high acquittal rates and unnecessary backlogs. In the vision of a developed India, he stressed that dissent should not be criminalized, advocating for greater tolerance of diverse views, debates, and criticism. “With a conviction percentage being less than 5% and a chance of acquittal being 95%, the question is, why should an accused be confined to jail for years and years together? This cannot be a model for Viksit Bharat,” he remarked. His speech underscores broader concerns about balancing security measures with fundamental rights, urging reforms to prevent the judiciary from enabling undue restrictions on freedom.
(Word count: 348)
**Suggested Category:** Politics