The highest number of cases, 277, was filed on November 9, while December 12 saw the highest disposals, 384. The Supreme Court disposed of a total of 6,844 cases including 1,163 bail matters between November 9, when Justice D Y Chandrachud took over as Chief Justice of India, and December 16, its last working day before the winter recess. A total of 5,898 cases were filed during this period. The highest number of cases, 277, was filed on November 9, while December 12 saw the highest disposals, 384. Besides bail and other matters, the court also disposed of 1,353 transfer petitions arising from matrimonial disputes. On November 18, CJI Chandrachud had announced that all benches of the court will take up 10 transfer petitions and 10 bail applications every day. He said that the decision was taken at a full court meeting and that all transfer petitions pending before the Supreme Court will be decided before the winter recess. The CJI had added that after the transfer petitions, all benches will take up 10 bail matters as they involve questions of personal liberty. “I have also directed that we will give priority to bail matters. So, 10 bail matters every day after transfer petitions because that is a matter of personal liberty. Ten transfer petitions because those are family matters, followed by 10 bail matters across all benches. Then we will start the regular work”, he had said. On December 14, Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju, speaking in the Rajya Sabha, had flagged the pendency of cases at the top court. He said he had urged the court to “take up those cases which are relevant and which are appropriate for the Supreme Court to take up. If the Supreme Court of India starts hearing bail applications, if the Supreme Court of India starts hearing all frivolous PILs, it will definitely cause a lot of extra burden on the hon. court itself because the Supreme Court, by and large, is treated as a constitutional court”. However, in an order on December 16, the court said that “right to personal liberty is a precious and inalienable right recognised by the Constitution” and lack of intervention by it can even lead to “serious miscarriage of justice”. A bench of CJI Chandrachud and Justice P S Narasimha said this in an order directing the sentence imposed on a man convicted under the Electricity Act to run concurrently and not consecutively. “The history of this Court indicates that it is in the seemingly small and routine matters involving grievances of citizens that issues of (the) moment, both in jurisprudential and constitutional terms, emerge. The intervention by this Court to protect the liberty of citizens is hence founded on sound constitutional principles embodied in Part III of the Constitution. The Court is entrusted with judicial powers under Article 32 and Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The right to personal liberty is a precious and inalienable right recognised by the Constitution. In attending to such grievances, the Supreme Court performs a plain constitutional duty, obligation and function; no more and no less”, the SC said.