WHY SHOULD SC INDULGE IN FLIPPANT COMMENTS AND WASTE ITS TIME? WHY CANNOT IT REFUSE TO HEAR SUCH CASES?
http://goo.gl/PnxaoA

Why SC is indulging in flippant comments? This is how the time of the court is wasted and why cases are pending for decades. In the US the Supreme Court does NOT hear each and every case referred to it. It decides beforehand which cases it will take up next and fixes date and duration for arguments. Once arguments are over, it takes its own time to decide on the matter. If it does not take up any case, it will mean the lower court's judgment stands or if it is some case which has landed up in the Supreme Court, it will mean the Court does not find any merit. In the famous case between Bush and Al Gore where the US SC was appealed to decide an issue that cropped up about the validity of some votes, the SC simply did not take up that case though it was such a momentous. Bush got, as most of the people think, undue advantage because of this.

When the US SC can refuse to hear even such an important case, cannot the Supreme Court and High Courts in India do likewise and stop taking at least frivolous cases; cases especially involving cinema actors and other VIPs. In the same manner it can refuse further hearing of similar cases and reinstate High Courts' judgment.

Even in cases involving any 'Constitutional issue'  it can refuse to hear any appeal if the SC feels that HC's judgment is OK and allow it to stand. After all it is the senior High Court judges who will become Supreme Court judges later on. If a study is made as to in how many percentage of appeals the SC differed from the HC's judgment, I am sure, we will see that enormous time of the court has been just wasted just for affixing its approval to the HC's judgment!

If the suggested procedure, of SC declining to hear appeals in cases deserving such a decision, is adopted a huge number of cases pending in High Courts and the Supreme Court can be disposed off in one stroke, especially where it finds the party appealing to the Supreme Court is only trying to gain time. Like the Salman Khan case or Aamir Khan case. I can see all advocates ganging up against this because their earnings will fall steeply. But imagine the relief to litigants! Fair play demands acceptance of this procedure so as to save not only time and energy and also the money spent on maintaining the courts.