Delay in compliance equals obstruction of justice: HC

Srinagar, Aug 08: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh Thursday held that speedy implementation of the orders of the court is inextricably interwoven in the enforcement of the rule of law even as it said long inaction towards compliance of the orders amounts to obstruction of justice.

Underscoring that speedy implementation of the orders of the court is part of the observance of the rule of law, a bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal said: “Compliance of the court’s orders and directions is imperative, else, it would have the tendency of shaking the confidence of the public in the administration of justice.

Long inaction and supine apathy towards compliance with the court’s orders and directions in a given case, tantamount to, obstructing the course of justice, inasmuch as, compliance with the court’s order has to be viewed as an integral part of the dispensation of justice and administration of justice.”

While the court noted that the state or union territory and its authorities are stakeholders in the facet of administration of justice, it said: “The orders passed by the courts of law are shelved for one or other reason either out of lethargy or because of red tape.”

The court pointed out that such a state of things is fatal to the interests of the administration of justice as “much more, it erodes the faith and confidence of a common man in the judicial machinery and judicial system”.

The court observed that one of the measures to judge the democratic commitment of any government is the respect it accords to the orders of the court.

“At the same time, the real majesty of the court lies in its vibrant existence and effective functioning. Such vibrancy and effectiveness, in turn, would be achieved by ensuring due implementation and swift obedience of the judgments and orders of the court,” it said.

The court made these observations while hearing at its Jammu wing, a case titled Madan Lal and Others versus Union Territory of J&K and Others.

The court observed that the instant case was a classic example of inaction on part of the government to comply with court orders saying notice was issued way back on May 26, 2023, the date on which the authorities were also directed to produce original records which led to the passing of order dated April 4, 2023, impugned in the present petition.

Pursuant thereto, it said, seven adjournments were sought on behalf of the respondents to file reply and in spite of availing various opportunities, response was not filed and the court was constrained to impose even costs of Rs 500 on May 3, 2024.

“In spite of availing several opportunities, till date, the reply has not been filed which speaks volumes of respect the respondents have for this court and the orders passed by this court from time to time,” the court said.

During today’s hearing, after hearing the parties, the court said: “It is very strange that the respondents despite availing various opportunities from time to time and imposition of costs have not bothered either to file a reply or to deposit the costs. What to talk of filing a reply, even the original record was also not produced and the aforesaid lackadaisical approach on behalf of the Government has constrained this court to grant interim relief to the petitioner, which was deferred on the very first day to have the response of the respondents.”

The court noted that the casual, lethargic, and insensitive approach on the part of the authorities towards the compliance of the orders and directions of the courts cannot be tolerated. While listing the plea for further hearing on September 18, 2024, the court said: “In the meantime, subject to objections from the other side and till next date before the bench, the operation of the order impugned being Order No 47-DC (Rsi) of 2023 dated April 4, 2023, issued by Deputy Commissioner Reasi, should remain stayed.”