Supreme Court Cautions Lawyers Against Arguing Against Settled Precedents

The Supreme Court on Thursday cautioned legal practitioners against wasting judicial time by contesting established legal positions merely to demonstrate argumentative skills.

The Bench emphasized that lawyers must respect binding precedents unless exceptional grounds for distinction exist.

The observation arose in a criminal case regarding the limitation period under Section 468 CrPC. Reaffirming the ruling in Sarah Mathew v. Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, the Court held that the limitation period is calculated from the date a complaint is filed, not the date cognizance is taken.

Consequently, the Court restored the criminal proceedings previously quashed by the High Court.

[Roma Ahuja v. The State & Anr.]