By Khushi Agarwal
Introduction
The term “adjournment” refers to a temporary halt to a present procedure or a postponement of the proceeding to a later date. Adjournment means either temporarily or permanently postponing or putting off the legal proceedings.
It can be either for a specified date or for an indefinite period which is known as sine die. Only Judges have the power to adjourn the case.
Although providing Adjournment is on the discretion of the Judge but the court cannot Suo moto adjourn the case unless any party makes a request for it.
What is the purpose of Adjournment?
There can be several reasons for granting Adjournment. In some cases it becomes necessary to grant Adjournment to ensure fair and equal justice to the parties involved. Some of the reasons can be as follows:
- When either of the party is not ready or requires more time to prepare, then that party can request for adjournment, that is, for postponing to a future date.
- To permit police to have more conversations with the person in question, their kids or other influenced individuals or to give more data about the matter under the watchful eye of the court.
- When any party requires legal representation or any other service that is not immediately available.
- When the evidences presented are not sufficient to decide the matter.
- When at the time of the proceedings, any of the witness in not present.
There are cases where it is better to adjourn the case rather than deciding it in favour of any party. This is because such adjournment can lead to better justice as by giving time, more in-depth analysis can take place and more facts and evidences can come into place.
Misuse of Adjournment
Adjournments can be very useful when used at the time when it is actually required. However, this is not what is happening in today’s time. There is a lot of misuse of Adjournment taking place which is leading to many bad results.
The practice of seeking unnecessary Adjournments is acting as a device to pull on the litigations which is causing abuse of law process and leading in delayed justice, one of the biggest effects of misuse of Adjournments. This is the reason why there are crores of cases pending in the courts.
There are parties who do not have any reason to obtain to delay the proceedings and just want to abuse the law processes to continue the crime for which they have been convicted.
For example, in cases of domestic violence, there may be cases where the party accused just want to continue with the act and thus may try to delay the proceedings by obtaining unnecessary Adjournment.
For this misuse different tactics may be used by the party such as not appearing at the day of the proceedings, making application without any ground or by seeking adjournment at a short notice, etc.
Delay in proceedings
It is said that “Justice delayed is Justice denied”. Giving unnecessary Adjournment is leading to delayed Justice which is ultimately leading to non-delivery of Justice. The entire purpose of Judiciary is thus is destroyed. Hence, Adjournments should not be given until it’s very necessary.
Timely judgments are important in the legal system. Unless the Court deems that adjourning the hearing beyond the next day is essential for reasons to be recorded, the hearing of the matter shall be continued from day to day until all of the witnesses in attendance have been examined.
The entire system of law, or the entire system of justice, will be affected by adjournment, with a well-known problem hurting the court’s operation.
This disease would destroy the public’s trust in the judiciary. Adjournment cannot be claimed as a right because it is at the Court’s discretion and cannot be claimed as such.
Currently, applications for adjournments are being filed before the Supreme Court on grounds that would have been unimaginable in the past and, if made, would have been met with a resounding refusal. Adjournments are the order of the day these days.
According to an article published by IIM Calcutta on the Adjournment, According to the report, there is a significant delay in the trial stage due to court processes such as non-attendance of witnesses, non-appearance of counsel, protracted oral arguments, arbitrary adjournments, and delayed decisions.
The average adjournment time for even passing judgment was nine weeks while court holidays and strikes consumed about five weeks.
Importance of on time trial
Providing timely Justice is also the duty of Judiciary besides providing Justice. Just providing Justice won’t help anyone and will just cause trouble to the parties. For example, the Nirbhaya case got justice after seven years. This would have caused so much trouble to the victim’s family. Provide such late justice is equivalent to providing no justice.
Adjournments cause delays in the resolution of cases. They also cause the parties and witnesses to suffer difficulty, inconvenience, and expense.
The witness has no personal interest in the case and has come to assist the court in the administration of justice. For this, he gives up his time and convenience.
If the case is adjourned, he will be expected to return to court on a regular basis. He’ll undoubtedly be dissatisfied and frustrated. This also gives the opposing party an opportunity to intimidate or persuade him not to tell the truth.
Even with modifications to the Civil Procedure Code limiting the number of adjournments permitted to three, postponement causes a significant delay in a case.
Therefore, justice must be delivered as early as possible without any delay and for this Adjournments must be reduced to a great extent.
Guidelines as per Order XVII of Civil Procedure Code
Although there are multiple guidelines and laws issued by the each court to reduce the number of Adjournments granted but there implementation is not such good. In spite of heavy fines imposed many times by the courts, there are many still lawyers who are unnecessarily taking Adjournments ignoring such fines.
Adjournment can only be given when the following conditions are satisfied:
As per Rule 1(1), the court can adjourn the hearing and may grant time to the parties only if sufficient cause is provided.
The court during the adjournment must fix a day for the next hearing and may even decide the cost of it, according to Rule 1(2).
Once the proceedings have started, it must not end until all the witnesses have been examined and should continue every day except for the reason that the court may think fit for providing Adjournment.
Adjournment should not be granted except when the situation is beyond the control of the party. It cannot be granted only for the reason that the pleader of the case is busy in another court.
Illness or inability of the pleader to conduct the case cannot be the ground for Adjournment unless the court thinks that the party asking for it could not have engaged another pleader on time.
If the party or his pleader is absent or is not ready to cross-examine the witness when the witness is present, the court can by his own record a statement of the witness and can pass the order as it may think fit.
Conclusion
Lawyers must remember that by requesting unnecessary adjournments, they are obstructing a legal right of one of the litigating parties, and so by using dilatory tactics, they are putting the litigating party in a position where he or she may lose faith in the judiciary.
Courts should very carefully assess each request for adjournment. Appropriate case management may include refusing an adjournment if it appears the respondent seeks the adjournment to prolong the proceedings and maintain control over the victim.
Adjournments are a well-known difficulty in the operation of courts since judges grant time to parties without adequate cause. Judges do have discretion and can issue any order they see fit, so even if the parties do not appear, the court can dismiss or issue an ex parte ruling. The purpose is to put off a decision on a case that is now before a court of law.
The reason will be stated by the parties, a lawyer on the basis of sudden illness or physical ailment for that fact evidence will be given that evidence should be properly examined if there is any proof that the evidence given was false immediate action should be taken against them in terms of fines or misleading the court of law or wasting court time can be considered as willful disobedience of the presiding judge.
It is the role of the courts to resolve problems as quickly as possible, and if the lawyers refuse to cooperate with the courts, a time will come when the court will be forced to settle the cases on its own, based on the record, and this condition will never benefit the litigating party.
Reference