In a tense courtroom exchange laced with disappointment and defiance, Justice K Natarajan of the Karnataka High Court pushed back against a resolution passed by the Advocates Association of Bengaluru (AAB) that called for part-heard matters before him to be reassigned.
“What was the necessity?” the judge asked aloud, clearly troubled. “A resolution is circulated on social media with my name and the Delhi case. Is this not damaging the image of the court?”
The resolution, passed on March 24, had raised alarm over the volume of part-heard cases before Justice Natarajan and requested their release. Though it was largely spurred by separate concerns involving another judge, the mention of Justice Natarajan’s name left him wondering why he was brought into the fray.
He noted that many of the part-heard matters had been stalled due to circumstances beyond his control—be it lawyers not being ready, extended arguments by senior counsel, or a backlog created by overloaded cause lists. “Is it possible to dispose of matters in five minutes?” he asked, pointing out that he often sits well beyond official hours, managing a staggering docket—over 16,000 cases initially, with 5,000 more added following a colleague’s retirement.
Despite emotional appeals from counsel not to release the part-heard cases, the judge began issuing a stream of orders doing exactly that. His reasoning: given his upcoming month-long stint at the Kalaburagi Bench and court holidays in April, those cases were unlikely to be heard anytime soon. He also cited the AAB’s threat of agitation if the matters weren’t reassigned.
“It came to the knowledge of this Court,” he said, “that through social media, the Bar Association requested the Chief Justice to release part-heard matters, otherwise they will go for agitation. Such being the case, it is not fit for me to take them up.”
One released matter happened to involve the father of the AAB’s current president, Vivek Subba Reddy. Justice Natarajan pointed this out in open court: “Though this matter was heard substantially… the very son of KN Subba Reddy, who is the president of AAB, passed a resolution for releasing part-heard matters. Hence, releasing the matter.”
Though the AAB resolution stemmed from broader concerns about transparency and delays, its inclusion of Justice Natarajan’s name has raised eyebrows, even within the legal fraternity. In a letter dated March 26, former AAB office bearers called the singling out of the judge a form of forum shopping and challenged the appropriateness of the move, especially in the absence of any serious misconduct.
Justice Natarajan, for his part, made it clear: he won’t continue hearing cases where his integrity has been publicly questioned. Any request to revive those part-heard matters, he suggested, would need to go through the Chief Justice.
The fallout continues—and so does the backlog.
