New Delhi, The Supreme Court has directed registrar generals of all high courts to furnish details to their chief justices on verdicts reserved but not pronounced for three months as it called one such case of delay before it "extremely shocking".
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra expressed concern after the Allahabad High Court failed to pass a judgment in a criminal appeal despite having reserved it in December 2021.
"It is extremely shocking and surprising that the judgment was not delivered for almost a year from the date when the appeal was heard. 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," the bench said.
Justice Mishra, who penned the order, underlined most high courts, lacked the mechanism enabling a litigant to approach the bench concerned or the chief justice and bring the point of delay to its notice.
"In such a situation, the litigant loses his faith in the judicial process defeating the ends of justice," the bench said.
Referring to its verdict in Anil Rai v. State of Bihar in 2001, the bench said it was reiterating the detailed guidelines issued then to ensure timely pronouncement of judgments.
"We reiterate the directions and direct the registrar general of each high court to furnish to its chief justice 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," it said.
If the judgment was not delivered within three months, the bench said, the registrar general should place the matters before the chief justice for orders.
The chief justice would then bring it to the notice of the bench concerned for pronouncing the order within two weeks from thereafter, failing which the matter would be assigned to another bench, it added.
The top court directed for its verdict to be shared with the registrar generals of the high courts for compliance.
In 2001, the top court issued a slew of directions, including the one asking chief justices of high courts to issue appropriate directions to the registry that in a case in which the "judgment is reserved and is pronounced later, a column be added in the judgment where, on the first page, after the cause-title, date of reserving the judgment and date of pronouncing it be separately mentioned by the court officer concerned".
In case a judgment was not pronounced within three months from the date of reserving it, any of the parties in the case were permitted to file an application in the high court with a prayer for early judgment, it added.
Such application when filed, the top court then said, should be listed before the bench concerned within two days excluding the intervening holidays.
"If the judgment, for any reason, is not pronounced within a period of six months, any of the parties of 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. It is open to the chief justice to grant the said prayer or to pass any other order as he deems fit in the circumstances," it added.
The bench was hearing a plea of one Ravindra Pratap Shahi.
The appellant, who has been pursuing the matter since 2008, alleged despite repeated requests and nine separate applications for early hearing, the appeal filed by a respondent languished without a final decision.
The top court observed the appeal was argued in detail before a division bench of the Allahabad High Court and reserved for orders on December 24, 2021, but no judgment was delivered even after over a year.
Following this, the matter was reassigned on the orders of the high court chief justice, but hearings were repeatedly deferred.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra expressed concern after the Allahabad High Court failed to pass a judgment in a criminal appeal despite having reserved it in December 2021.
"It is extremely shocking and surprising that the judgment was not delivered for almost a year from the date when the appeal was heard. 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," the bench said.
Justice Mishra, who penned the order, underlined most high courts, lacked the mechanism enabling a litigant to approach the bench concerned or the chief justice and bring the point of delay to its notice.
"In such a situation, the litigant loses his faith in the judicial process defeating the ends of justice," the bench said.
Referring to its verdict in Anil Rai v. State of Bihar in 2001, the bench said it was reiterating the detailed guidelines issued then to ensure timely pronouncement of judgments.
"We reiterate the directions and direct the registrar general of each high court to furnish to its chief justice 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," it said.
If the judgment was not delivered within three months, the bench said, the registrar general should place the matters before the chief justice for orders.
The chief justice would then bring it to the notice of the bench concerned for pronouncing the order within two weeks from thereafter, failing which the matter would be assigned to another bench, it added.
The top court directed for its verdict to be shared with the registrar generals of the high courts for compliance.
In 2001, the top court issued a slew of directions, including the one asking chief justices of high courts to issue appropriate directions to the registry that in a case in which the "judgment is reserved and is pronounced later, a column be added in the judgment where, on the first page, after the cause-title, date of reserving the judgment and date of pronouncing it be separately mentioned by the court officer concerned".
In case a judgment was not pronounced within three months from the date of reserving it, any of the parties in the case were permitted to file an application in the high court with a prayer for early judgment, it added.
Such application when filed, the top court then said, should be listed before the bench concerned within two days excluding the intervening holidays.
"If the judgment, for any reason, is not pronounced within a period of six months, any of the parties of 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. It is open to the chief justice to grant the said prayer or to pass any other order as he deems fit in the circumstances," it added.
The bench was hearing a plea of one Ravindra Pratap Shahi.
The appellant, who has been pursuing the matter since 2008, alleged despite repeated requests and nine separate applications for early hearing, the appeal filed by a respondent languished without a final decision.
The top court observed the appeal was argued in detail before a division bench of the Allahabad High Court and reserved for orders on December 24, 2021, but no judgment was delivered even after over a year.
Following this, the matter was reassigned on the orders of the high court chief justice, but hearings were repeatedly deferred.
You may also like
Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce engaged: MAGA world reacts — and you won't believe what they said
Arsenal sent firm Piero Hincapie transfer message as private jet cancelled
Man arrested for robbing Sikar jeweller
Ofgem energy price cap explained - how you can beat it and save hundreds
US Open: Carlos Alcaraz amused by reaction to his accidental buzz cut
