Shocking: Supreme Court flags hundreds of criminal cases in Maharashtra where charges not framed for decades

The Supreme Court recently expressed deep concern over what it described as a “shocking state of affairs” in Maharashtra after the Bombay High Court revealed that charges have not been framed in at least 649 criminal cases, even though charge sheets in some of those matters were filed as far back as 2006 [Shubham Ganpati @ Ganesh Rathod vs. The State of Maharashtra].

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and NK Singh noted that the reasons cited for these delays were varied, but one issue was common across districts - the non-production of accused or non-appearance of advocates, including both prosecutors and defence counsel.

The Court found this pattern unacceptable and directed the High Court to conduct a deeper inquiry. It ordered the Registrar General to call for reports from every District and Sessions Judge in Maharashtra detailing what steps have been taken to ensure that charges were framed without delay and whether bail cancellations or disciplinary actions had been considered in cases of persistent non-cooperation.

The Court was hearing a plea filed by one Shubham Ganpati alias Ganesh Rathod who has been in jail since April 2021 with the trial yet to commence in the case. The top court found that despite the chargesheet having been filed in July 2021, the case had not moved an inch towards framing of charges.

In an earlier order dated September 9, the bench had directed the Registrar General of the Bombay High Court to explain why the trial had not progressed in Rathod’s case and to also gather data on other undertrials across Maharashtra whose charges remained pending despite chargesheets being filed over four years ago.

The bench had observed that prolonged pre-trial detention violated the fundamental right to a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Court noted that the accused had been in custody for more than four years, yet his status remained the same as it was on day one of his incarceration. It then directed the High Court to ascertain the reasons for the delay and examine all similar cases across the State.

When the matter came up on October 7, the Registrar General filed an affidavit in compliance. The Court found the contents of the affidavit alarming.

"Registrar General of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay has filed an affidavit annexing certain documents which we have perused. To say the least, it is a reflection of a very shocking state of affairs, insofar as the conduct of trials before different Courts in the State of Maharashtra is concerned," the Court said.

The bench noted that the affidavit revealed hundreds of cases where charge sheets had been filed between 2006 and 2020 but charges were still not framed.

“The affidavit reveals that there are at least 649 cases in which charges are yet to be framed, despite filing of charge sheets in certain cases way back in the year 2006, 2013, 2014 and onwards till the year 2020,” the Court said.

Before issuing further directions, the bench stressed the need for accountability.

It noted that the High Court had already issued circulars earlier this year mandating the physical or virtual production of undertrial prisoners to avoid unnecessary adjournments. The Supreme Court, however, wanted to know whether those directions were being followed in spirit.

The Registrar General was directed to file another affidavit within ten days, outlining compliance with the latest directions and apprising the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court of the Supreme Court’s observations.

The case will be heard next on October 17.

The petitioner was represented by advocates Anand Dilip Landge, Sangeeta Nenwani, Revati Pravin Kharde, Shreenivas Patil and Rahul Prakash Pathak.

The State was represented by advocates Prashant Shrikant Kenjale, B Dhananjay, Damini Vishwakarma, Srishty Pandey, Shrirang B Varma, Siddharth Dharmadhikari and Aaditya Aniruddha Pande.

[Read Order]