The Supreme Court on Monday expressed concern over inordinate delay by High Courts in delivering judgments after concluding hearings [Ravindra Pratap Singh vs State of UP].

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra said that such delay in delivering reserved judgments was “extremely shocking and surprising.”

The Court was hearing appeals filed by one Ravindra Pratap Shahi challenging interim orders of the Allahabad High Court in a criminal case pending since 2008.

The criminal appeal had been heard at length and reserved for orders by a Division Bench of the High Court on December 24, 2021. However, no judgment was delivered, compelling the matter to be placed before another Bench.

The top court recorded that despite repeated applications for early disposal, no final verdict was passed.

“It is extremely shocking and surprising that the judgment was not delivered for almost a year from the date when the appeal was heard,” the apex court observed.

The Court noted that it was 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.

Referring to its earlier ruling in Anil Rai v. State of Bihar, the Court reiterated that timely pronouncement of judgments was an essential part of the justice delivery system.

Hence, it proceeded to order that Registrars of every High Court must to prepare a report every month containing the list of cases in which judgments have been reserved but not delivered during that month. The same has to be furnished to the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, the top court directed.

If a judgment is not pronounced within three months, the Registrar General must place the matter before the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice shall then draw the attention of the concerned Bench and direct pronouncement within two weeks, failing which the case must be reassigned to another Bench.

“These directions are in addition to those already issued by this Court in Anil Rai,” the Bench clarified.

The Court also directed that a copy of the judgment be circulated to the Registrar Generals of all High Courts for compliance.

Senior Advocate S Nagamuthu, along with Advocates Devesh Mohan, Kush Chaturvedi , Prerna Priyadarshini, Syed Faraz Alam, Atharva Gaur, Aayushman Aggarwal and Ayesha Choudhary appeared for the appellant.

Advocate Preetika Dwivedi appeared for the respondents.

[Read Judgment]