Speedy justice? Supreme Court prescribes timelines for oral arguments by lawyers

“Arguing counsel and/or Senior Advocates, through their advocate-on-record or nodal counsel/s nominated by Hon’ble Court, if any, shall file a brief note / written submission not exceeding five (5) pages, after serving its copy on the other side, at least three (3) days prior to the date of hearing, in order to ensure compliance of such timeline,” the circular issued on December 29 read.

The circular further mandates all counsel to strictly adhere to the timelines fixed and conclude their oral arguments.

According to the circular, the SOPs are aimed at facilitating effective court management and equitable distribution of court working hours. It is further aimed at ensuring speedy and proper administration of justice.

“In order to facilitate effective court management and equitable distribution of Court working hours and to ensure speedy and proper administration of justice, as directed by Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India and all the Hon’ble Judges, there shall be a Standard Operating Procedure for adhering to timelines for submission of oral arguments in all cases, with immediate effect,” the circular read.

“More brevity and crispness in articulation”

Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra welcomed the move and said that it will lead to brevity in court, crispness in thought and articulation.

He said that in a game of tackling numbers, both lawyers and judges have lost out on brevity and time sensitivity. “Brevity in court requires adequate time for contemplation and analysis”, he added.

“Till 1980’s our seniors would tell us you would see a lot more brevity, crispness in thought and in articulation. Today, we get away by reading long passages from books often as fillers. Our pleadings contain law and evidence and are verbose. Consequently our oral arguments are too lengthy. I think it’s important for us to be focused and this is a great start,” he said.

Luthra reflected on virtual hearings during the covid when lawyers had to make precise submissions owing to time constraints.

“One of the classic examples was that when COVID happened and we had to shift to VC, we found that a lot of us lawyers, were trying to be more precise and crisp because you had that little window before the systems failed or there were sound issues or you were muted.  So everybody tended to make their points within that limited time. I believe we need to be more time sensitive as lawyers,” he said.

Luthra expressed hope that the Bar will come on board along with the Judges to reduce the time for oral arguments and ensure every litigant has his/her time and say in court.

“Timely and necessary”

Speaking to the Indian Express on the development, Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record, Charu Mathur, welcomed the move and said the issuance of the SOP is both “timely and necessary”.

“This is a welcome step. Almost all mature jurisdictions restrict lengthy oral arguments and place primary reliance on written submissions, and as a first institutional move the SOP is both timely and necessary, though it will require further fine-tuning as the Court gains experience with its implementation,” she said.

Mathur highlighted that the striking feature of the SOP is its mandatory application across all Benches, with the Advocate-on-Record required to indicate the proposed duration of arguments through the online appearance portal, thereby strengthening accountability, transparency, and credibility.

“In substance, the spirit of this SOP already finds recognition in Order LV Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules, which empowers the Court to ascertain and fix the time for arguments. It is also worth recalling Order XXI Rule 13 and Order XXII Rule 9, which contemplate short-disposal matters at the stage of granting special leave, though it remains unclear whether these provisions have been consistently followed in practice,” she added.

Mathur remarked that the SOP is a step in the right direction but emphasised that its success will depend on calibrated application and continued refinement.

“The proliferation of after-notice matters has further blurred the discipline of formally granting leave, an issue that has begun to be addressed since Justice Surya Kant assumed office as Chief Justice. The SOP is therefore a step in the right direction, but its success will depend on calibrated application and continued procedural refinement,” she said.