Apex court needs sharper focus, not more judges

Following a recent Cabinet decision, an ordinance has been promulgated expanding the strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38 judges.

- Rishad A Chowdhury

Following a recent Cabinet decision, an ordinance has been promulgated expanding the strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38 judges. What is striking is how commonplace, and entirely shorn of debate, this has become. In 2019, the strength of the Court was increased from 31 to 34 judges, with a law speedily enacted with little public discussion. And it is natural, perhaps, that this increase is seen as a self-evidently “good” measure, since it “enhances the resources” available to the Court.

But one might ask — how has the increase from 26 to 31, and from 31 to 34, worked so far? And if these haven't worked well, as we might all agree, is a further increase to 38 as inarguably beneficial as it seems to be assumed?

Justice KK Mathew, many decades ago, prophetically warned of the dangers of mechanical increase in judge strength — for the apex court — to combat a large inflow of cases. Surely we cannot imagine a Court with a hundred judges, he said. In this renewed move to increase the court strength, one is reminded of the old story of the doctor in mediaeval times who prescribed blood-letting for a serious ailment. Seeing the patient getting weaker, the doctor, convinced the treatment is inadequate, increases the rate of drawing blood, and the inevitable consequence follows.