The debate on role of 'simultaneous bilateral cataract surgery' (SBCS) continues. The world population has exponentially increased during last fifty years and average human lifespan has increased by a decade during the last century. This translates to ever increasing geriatric population with its inherent problem of preventable blindness because of cataract formation in the elderly. We are adding to the backlog of cataract surgeries not only in the 'developing world' but also in the 'developed world.' Times demand that we reconsider our old fashioned approach of staggering bilateral cataract surgeries. Serious, but a potential, risk of simultaneous bilateral infection/endophthalmitis has been the biggest deterrent in acceptance of SBCS as a routine procedure. The opponents of SBCS strongly believe in this argument that has not been documented when strictly followed the recommendations regarding separate procedures of each eye. The advantages of reducing the ever-increasing backlog of preventable/treatable blindness, faster visual recovery, economic benefits to patients as well as health care providers, lesser risk of amblyopia in pediatric population, and decreased risk of as serious a complication as death by exposure to general anesthesia in pediatric and adult population, etc. outweigh the disadvantages of SBCS when compared with 'delayed bilateral cataract surgery' (DBCS). SBCS is favored over DBCS in pediatric population and in uncooperative, mentally retarded and physically disabled adults needing general anesthesia to reduce the risks and complications of general anesthesia. Considering such factors and review of available literature strongly support that SBCS has a definite role where indicated, under certain circumstances, and in certain select group of patients in both developing as well as developed countries.