Supreme Court Weighs 24x7 Emergency Protocol to Safeguard Life and Liberty
The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to consider framing a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that would allow citizens to seek judicial protection at any time, day or night, in urgent cases affecting life and liberty. These include illegal detentions, imminent demolition of homes, deportations, and custodial violence.
A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant was hearing a petition filed by advocate Maheravish Rein, who argued that courts cannot remain closed in the face of credible reports of late-night arrests, early morning demolition drives, and executive actions undertaken during weekends or holidays.
“The absence of a structured and institutionalised mechanism ensuring continuous judicial accessibility may result in irreversible consequences before affected persons are able to approach constitutional courts… The protection of liberty cannot remain dependent upon the temporal boundaries of court schedules,” Ms. Rein submitted.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi, part of the Bench, noted a difference in accessing justice during office hours and after. He said a “graded approach” to after-hours access should not be seen as a denial of justice. He highlighted that courts never truly close, given digital e-filing options. “A letter, an email or a phone call would be enough to activate the justice system,” Justice Bagchi observed.
Ms. Rein agreed that technological advancements like digital filing and virtual hearings have enhanced remote access, but argued these have not been integrated into a uniform institutional framework for emergency matters outside regular hours.
The Bench indicated that an SOP could reduce the “response time” for urgent requests. Chief Justice Kant remarked, “Maybe the response from the court should come within an hour of such an urgent mention.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta suggested the SOP be prepared on the administrative side rather than the judicial side. However, the Chief Justice responded that state High Courts do not fall under the Supreme Court's administrative ambit in a federal setup, implying that the matter may need to be heard on the judicial side.
