Judiciary must neither be eternal critic nor cheerleader: Justice Bhuyan

Supreme Court judge, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, on Sunday (March 22, 2026) said there were many within the judiciary who continue to suffer from the “more loyal than the king syndrome”, while pointing to the reticence shown by courts to grant bail, leading to prolonged incarceration for undertrials.

“The judiciary must remain judiciary. Judiciary can neither be an eternal critic nor a cheerleader. It is the sentinel on the qui vive (alert),” Justice Bhuyan said at the 1st Supreme Court Bar Association National Conference 2026 on the topic ‘The Role of Judiciary in Viksit Bharat’ in Bengaluru.

The judge flagged the “reckless” registration of criminal cases, even for student protests, memes, and social media posts.

“For trivial matters, such as public demonstrations, agitations, even by students, sometimes even for putting up memes and social media posts, FIRs (First Information Reports) are registered, and investigations go on. Matters come up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has to constitute Special Investigation Teams. This consumes sufficient judicial time,” Justice Bhuyan pointed out.

He said the judiciary were also partly responsible for the prolonged incarcerations without bail.

“I must admit, many within the judiciary continue to suffer from the ‘more loyal than the king’ syndrome. As a result, people continue to languish in jails for months and months together,” the apex court judge said.

The judge spoke of the “overuse” of draconian laws, including the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). As of March 2025, 7,771 Enforcement Case Information Reports (ECIR) had been filed, he said. The number of arrests made were 1,031. Trials had concluded in only 47 cases.

“How do you justify keeping these people in jail for months and years together when the maximum sentence is seven years?” Justice Bhuyan asked.

The miniscule conviction rate when compared with the arrests made show that cases were built on flimsy evidence which did not stand up in court, he said. These cases not only contribute to backlog, but raise fundamental questions of liberty.

“With a conviction percentage being less than 5% and a chance of acquittal being 95%, the question is, why should an accused be confined to jail for years and years together? This cannot be a model for Viksit Bharat,” Justice Bhuyan said.

Dissent should not be criminalised in ‘Viksit Bharat’, neither should debate or divergent views, he said.

“In Viksit Bharat, there should be more space for dissent and debate. Dissent should not be criminalised. There should be more tolerance towards diverse views and criticism,” Justice Bhuyan said.