Raising serious concerns over judicial delays, the Supreme Court on Monday, directed the Registrar Generals of all High Courts to submit detailed reports on cases where judgments have been reserved on or before January 31, 2025, but are yet to be pronounced.

A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice NK Singh issued the direction while hearing a writ petition filed by four convicts alleging inordinate delays in the pronouncement of verdicts on their criminal appeals by the Jharkhand High Court—some pending for over two to three years.

The order states:
"The Registrar Generals of all High Courts shall submit a report regarding all cases where judgments were reserved on or before 31.01.2025 but are still pending pronouncement. The data must separately include civil and criminal matters, indicating whether the matter was heard by a single judge or a division bench."

Terming the delay in judgment as "very disturbing", Justice Surya Kant remarked that the Court is inclined to lay down mandatory guidelines to address such delays, asserting, “It can't be allowed to happen like this.”

In the present case, Advocate Fauzia Shakil, appearing for the petitioners, informed the Court that although the Jharkhand High Court has disposed of many criminal appeals since the Supreme Court issued notice, the petitioners' appeals are still pending. Two of these cases are listed for judgment on the day of the hearing, she added.

The Court also referred to a report by The Indian Express which highlighted that the Jharkhand High Court disposed of 75 criminal appeals within a week after the Supreme Court intervened. The Bench has now asked the Registrar General of the Jharkhand High Court to submit a list of these 75 cases, specifying the dates on which verdicts were reserved and subsequently pronounced.

The petitioners—all from Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes—have been convicted for serious offences including murder and rape and are serving life sentences. One has already spent over 16 years in prison, while the others have been in custody for 11 to 14 years.

Earlier, the Court had directed the Registrar General of the High Court to submit a sealed status report on reserved judgments and had also issued notice on the convicts' applications for suspension of sentence, noting that they cannot seek remission until judgments are pronounced.

According to the plea, the convicts are lodged at Birsa Munda Central Jail in Ranchi and had filed appeals against their convictions in 2022. Despite completion of hearings, the judgments remain pending, allegedly violating their right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The petition cites the landmark decisions in Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar and Akhtari Bi v. State of M.P., where the Supreme Court upheld that the right to a speedy trial extends to appellate proceedings.

The plea also references HPA International v. Bhagwandas Fateh Chand Daswani and Anil Rai v. State of Bihar, where the Court condemned prolonged delays in judgment delivery. It further alleges that 10 other convicts are similarly placed, with verdicts reserved over three years ago.

On the issue of suspension of sentence, the petition refers to Saudan Singh v. State of U.P. and In Re Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, where the Supreme Court held that bail should be the norm if a convict has served more than eight years in custody.

Despite making several representations to the Chief Justice of India, the Chief Justice of the Jharkhand High Court, and legal aid authorities, as well as submitting requests to jail officials, the petitioners claim they received no response.

The writ petition, Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan and Ors. v. State of Jharkhand & Anr., W.P.(Crl.) No. 169/2025, has been filed through Advocate-on-Record Fauzia Shakil.