Justice Sanjay Karol, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, Supreme Court
Place Matter Before Chief Justice If Reserved Judgment Is Not Delivered Within 3 Months: Supreme Court To High Courts' Registrar Generals
|The Appeals before the Supreme Court were preferred against the impugned interim orders passed by the Allahabad High Court, by which the criminal appeal was not taken up for hearing.
Expressing shock and concern over the delay in the delivery of judgments by the High Courts, the Supreme Court has issued directions to combat such a problem. The Apex Court has directed that if a reserved judgment is not delivered within three months, the Registrar General shall place the matter before the Chief Justice for orders, and the Chief Justice shall bring it to the notice of the concerned Bench for pronouncing the order within two weeks thereafter, failing which the matter shall be assigned to another Bench.
The Appeals before the Apex Court were preferred against the impugned interim orders passed by the Allahabad High Court, by which the criminal appeal preferred by the second respondent was not taken up for hearing.
The Division Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra ordered, “We reiterate the directions and direct the Registrar General of each High Court to furnish to the Chief Justice of the High Court a list of cases where the judgment reserved is not pronounced within the remaining period of that month and keep on repeating the same for three months. If the judgment is not delivered within three months, the Registrar General shall place the matters before the Chief Justice for orders and the Chief Justice shall bring it to the notice of the concerned Bench for pronouncing the order within two weeks thereafter, failing which the matter be assigned to another Bench.
Senior Advocate S. Nagamuthu represented the Appellant, while AOR Preetika Dwivedi represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
By an order dated April 15, 2025, the Apex Court had requested the High Court to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months. The criminal appeal pending before the High Court was earlier reserved for orders on December 24, 2021, but the judgment was not delivered. When the Apex Court heard this matter on January 27, 2025, the Bench directed the Registrar General of the High Court to immediately bring the issue to the notice of the Chief Justice.
The Registrar General of the High Court submitted his report saying that since the judgment was not delivered within six months, in light of the administrative order of the Chief Justice, the case was ordered to be listed before a Regular Bench (as per roster). The matter was again placed before the Chief Justice on December 19, 2022, upon which it was directed that the matter be listed as per the roster on January 9, 2023. On this date, no one appeared for the appellant. The appeal was adjourned for hearing on February 6, 2023 and, thereafter, on subsequent dates, the hearing did not materialise.
Reasoning
Expressing shock over the fact that the judgment was not delivered for almost a year from the date when the appeal was heard, the Bench stated, “This Court is repeatedly confronted with similar matters wherein proceedings are kept pending in the High Court for more than three months, in some cases for more than six months or years wherein judgments are not delivered after hearing the matter. In most of the High Courts, there is no mechanism where the litigant can approach the concerned Bench or the Chief Justice bringing to its notice the delay in delivery of judgment. In such situation, the litigant loses his faith in the judicial process defeating the ends of justice.”
Reference was made to the judgment in Anil Rai vs. State of Bihar (2001), where the Apex Court dealt with such state of affairs prevalent in some High Courts. The Court had passed various directions. It was ordered therein that if, for any reason, the judgment is not pronounced within a period of six months, any of the parties to the said lis shall be entitled to move an application before the Chief Justice of the High Court with a prayer to withdraw the said case and to make it over to any other Bench for fresh arguments.
Reaffirming such directions, the Bench held that if the judgment is not delivered within three months, the Chief Justice shall bring it to the notice of the concerned Bench for pronouncing the order within two weeks thereafter, failing which the matter shall be assigned to another Bench. The Bench thus disposed of the appeal and also added, “The above direction is in addition to the guidelines/directions issued by this Court in Anil Rai (supra).”
“Let a copy of this judgment be circulated to the Registrar Generals of all the High Courts for compliance”, it concluded.
Cause Title: Ravindra Pratap Shahi v. State of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1039)
Appearance
Appellant: Senior Advocate S. Nagamuthu, Advocate Devesh Mohan, AOR Kush Chaturvedi, Advocates Prerna Priyadarshini, Syed Faraz Alam, Atharva Gaur, Aayushman Aggarwal, Ayesha Choudhary
Respondent: AOR Preetika Dwivedi