HomeNewsIndia'Immature': SC bar association chief slams PM advisor Sanjeev Sanyal's 'judiciary biggest hurdle' remark

'Immature': SC bar association chief slams PM advisor Sanjeev Sanyal's 'judiciary biggest hurdle' remark

"To say that judiciary is responsible for India's developmental hurdles is very immature,” Singh asserted, rejecting Sanyal’s claim.

September 30, 2025 / 22:09 IST
Story continues below Advertisement
Vikas Singh (R) described Sanjeev Sanyal's (L) remark as “irresponsible” and “made in bad taste,” insisting that it reflected “a lack of understanding of how the courts function.”
Vikas Singh (R) described Sanjeev Sanyal's (L) remark as “irresponsible” and “made in bad taste,” insisting that it reflected “a lack of understanding of how the courts function.”

Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President and Senior Advocate Vikas Singh came down heavily on economist and Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council member Sanjeev Sanyal for calling the judiciary the “biggest hurdle” in India’s journey towards Viksit Bharat. He described the remark as “irresponsible” and “made in bad taste,” insisting that it reflected “a lack of understanding of how the courts function.”

“To say that judiciary is responsible for India's developmental hurdles is very immature,” Singh asserted, rejecting Sanyal’s claim. “The greater part of the ills in the system are actually because of the government.” He pointed to insufficient infrastructure, low judicial pay, and flawed appointments as the real reasons behind delays in justice delivery.

Story continues below Advertisement

On judicial vacations, Singh defended the practice, clarifying that the breaks were not indulgent. “Judges spend weekends reading case files and writing judgments, and without periodic breaks, there would be a classic case of burnout,” he explained. He further said bureaucrats who question these breaks often realise the intensity of judicial work only when they themselves serve on tribunals.

Turning to reforms, Singh argued that the government could easily create a transparent system for judicial appointments without undermining judicial independence. “The NJAC was struck down only on the ground that the executive had the upper hand in deciding the appointments. Why cannot the Government bring a law which will ensure a transparent method of appointments without compromising the judiciary's primacy?” he asked.