Supreme Court Issues Guidelines To High Courts To Avoid Delay In Delivering Reserved Judgments; Sets 3 Month Timelimit

The Supreme Court today issued a set of guidelines, which shall operate as "binding directions", to the High Courts to avoid delays in pronouncing judgments in reserved matters.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi set a timelimit of three months to deliver judgments in matters where it is reserved. The orders in bail applications should be pronounced the same day, and if it is reserved, it must be pronounced and uploaded the next day.

If the bench which reserved the judgment does not deliver the judgment within four months of reserving, an application can be filed before the Chief Justice to withdraw the matter to another bench.

Where only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced, the reasoned judgment must be uploaded within fifteen days.

Some of the directions are as follows :

1. In a matter where the judgment is reserved, the High Court shall endeavour to pronounce the reasoned judgment within three months from the date of reserving judgment.

2. High Courts must display extra promptitude in pronouncing matters concerning personal liberty, regular bail, anticipatory bail etc.

2. Bail applications should be heard and the order should preferably be pronounced and uploaded the same day. If it is reserved, it should be pronounced on the next day and uploaded to the website.

3. Orders granting bail or sentence suspension should be communicated to the jail authorities as soon as it is pronounced, and the undertrial/ convict should be released, preferably the same day or at most the next day, unless they are required in any other case or delay in complying with bail conditions. Compliance report in this regard be reported by the trial court to the High Court.

4. If judgement in criminal appeal or a death reference is reserved and the appellant is in custody, clarification can be sought by the bench from the parties within 7 days of the date of reserving the judgment. In other cases, the clarification should not be sought beyond one month of the date of reserving.

4. If the bench is of the opinion that any delay in pronouncing reasoned judgment can cause hardship to the parties, and urgent orders are required, the operative part may be pronounced in court, and the reasoned judgment should be uploaded within 7 days or a maximum 15 days, if practical difficulties are faced. Such cases may include habeas corpus matters, criminal appeals resulting in acquittal, matters relating to demolition, etc.

5. Reasoned judgment pronounced in open courts should be uploaded on the High Court website within 24 hours.

6. Chief Justice of the High Court on the administrative side must ensure that necessary changes are made on the High Court website, where at the end of every month, an automated email is sent to the Chief Justice specifying all the reserved cases pending in that month along with the copy to the bench which reserved the judgment. CJ of the HC must also see the desirability of circulating a list of cases in which judgments are not delivered within 2 months of reserving amongst the judges of the High Court. Such communication shall be sealed and confidential.

6. If reserved judgment is not delivered within 3 months, the Registrar General shall placed the matter before the Chief Justice for orders, and the Chief Justice shall bring it to the notice of the bench within 2 weeks thereafter. If it is still not delivered within 2 weeks thereafter, the Chief Justice may assign the case to another bench with notification to the advocates and parties.  The new bench may rehear the case and pronoucne the judgment promptly.

7. Where the operative portion is pronounced in the open court, and the reasoned judgment is not uploaded within 15 days, 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 within the next two days.

8. In case the judgment is not pronounced within three months from the date of reserving, any party to the lis is permitted to file an application before the High Court for release of the judgment. Such an application shall be listed within 2 days. The Registry shall inform the Chief Justice of all such applications filed. 

9. If the judgment is not pronounced within 3+1 months from the date of reserving, any party to the lis shall be entitled to move an application before the Chief Justice to withdraw the said case and make it over to any other bench for fresh arguments.

10. If the reasoned judgment is not uploaded within 15 days from the pronouncement of the operative part,  any party to the list can file an application for early judgment. Such application be listed before the concerned bench within 2 days. The Registry shall inform the Chief Justice of such applications.

11. If the reasoned judgment is not pronounced within one month of the pronouncement of the operative portion, any party to the lis shall be entitled to move an application before the Chief Justice to withdraw the case from the bench and assign it to another bench.

12. The certified copy of the judgments shall mention the date of reserving the judgment, the date of pronouncing the judgment, and the date of uploading the judgment. Where the operative portion of the judgment has already been delivered, the date of pronouncing the operative part shall be the date of pronouncement, and the date on which the reasoned judgment is delivered shall be the date of uploading.

13. High Courts should update their website. The date of reserving judgment shall be reflected in the case status. If the operative portion is delivered, the case status must record it. When the reasoned judgment is uploaded, the parties/advocates shall be informed by email.

14. The Registrar Generals of the High Courts are to place these guidelines before the Chief Justice so that appropriate amendments can be carried out in the rules to incorporate these guidelines.

The Court took up this issue while considering a petition challenging the Jharkhand High Court's delay in pronouncing judgments in certain criminal appeals. The Court decided to go into the larger issue, and sought details from all High Courts on pending judgments.

Background

The matter arose from a writ petition filed by four convicts belonging to Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes who alleged that their criminal appeals, reserved by the Jharkhand High Court in 2022, remained pending for two to three years without judgment. They argued that such delays violated their right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, including the right to a speedy trial, which extends to appellate proceedings.

To assist the Court, amicus curiae Advocate Fauzia Shakil submitted draft guidelines to ensure timely pronouncement of judgments. Among other measures, the draft proposed that High Courts endeavour to deliver reasoned judgments within three months of reserving them, display details of long-pending reserved judgments on their websites, and give priority to matters involving personal liberty, including bail cases, criminal appeals involving incarcerated convicts, and death sentence references. Similar guidelines were suggested for district courts.

The draft also suggested administrative monitoring by Chief Justices of High Courts, public disclosure of cases where judgments remain reserved beyond three months, timelines for uploading reasoned judgments after pronouncing operative orders, and mechanisms enabling litigants to seek early pronouncement or reassignment of matters in cases of prolonged delay.

The issue of delayed judgments is not new. Previously too, the Supreme Court has issued directions to the High Courts on the timely pronouncement of judgments in reserved matters. In Anil Rai v. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court, way back in 2001, had issued a set of guidelines to the High Court.

Case no. – W.P.(Crl.) No. 169/2025

Case Title – Pila Pahan@Peela Pahan and Ors. v. State of Jharkhand and Anr.