The Allahabad High Court last week expressed serious concern over the prolonged pendency of final reports in criminal cases across Uttar Pradesh. The Court noted that approximately 50,000 matters involving final reports are pending for orders in the Lucknow judgeship alone.

Observing that such delays adversely affect the administration of criminal justice, a bench of Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari sought district-wise data from all District & Sessions Judges across UP regarding the pendency of final reports and the measures being taken to clear the backlog.

The single passed the order while hearing an application under Section 529 BNSS filed by 2 businessmen seeking expeditious disposal of a final report submitted in a criminal case against them involving offences of Forgery and Criminal Breach of Trust.

According to the applicants, although a final report had been filed by the Police before the court concerned in July 2020, and a notice has been issued to the complainant, the matter still remains pending.

They submitted that because of the pendency, their passports are not being renewed conveniently, and it is causing a hindrance in traveling abroad.

They also pointed out that despite an earlier High Court order directing the trial court to decide the matter expeditiously, no final order had been passed.

Taking note of the grievance, the Court remarked that the issue extended far beyond the present case.

"It is a matter of deep concern that the final reports submitted before the courts at the district level are being kept pending for long time. Even in a single judgeship i.e. Lucknow Judgeship, approximately 50000 cases are pending for disposal of the final reports", the Court observed.

The Bench further noted that although notice is required to be issued to the complainant upon submission of a final report, “the delay caused, owing to non-service of notice to the complainant/informant, is not understandable because the ultimate sufferer is the accused, relating to whom the final reports have been filed”.

It added that similar pendency exists in districts across the State.

In a strong observation, the bench added that these final reports have been pending for years, not due to the parties, but because of the "indifference on the part of the Presiding Officers".

"Once the final report is submitted before the court concerned, the Presiding Officers of the such court, is the first and foremost responsible officer under whose domain the matter comes. Unfortunately, this is the area where the system has failed to deliverance in time", the Court remarked.

The Court added that while contested matters cannot be decided in haste, it was difficult to understand how final reports submitted after completion of investigation could be kept pending for such long periods.

Regarding the consequences of such delays, the Bench said that the prolonged pendency of final reports is not in the interest of justice, as it delays the criminal process and causes unnecessary hardship to the parties.

Though the single judge acknowledged that neither the CrPC nor the BNSS prescribes any specific timeline for the disposal of final reports, the inordinate and prolonged pendency of such reports cannot be permitted to continue.

Accordingly, in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Section 483 CrPC/Section 529 BNSS, the High Court directed all District & Sessions Judges, through the Registrar General/Senior Registrar, to ensure that courts under their administrative control periodically review the pendency of final reports and accord priority to matters that have remained pending for a considerable period, particularly where notices have already been issued to the complainant or informant.

The District Judges were also directed to impress upon the Chief Judicial Magistrates and other Magistrates to make "earnest endeavors" for the expeditious disposal of cases so that the existing backlog is substantially reduced and the administration of criminal justice is rendered more effective and efficient.

The Court has also called for reports from every District & Sessions Judge in Uttar Pradesh specifying:

i) How many final reports are pending (court-wise) in their District;

ii) Reason for not passing any order on the pending final reports;

iii) Action taken by the concerned learned District and Session Judges regarding the disposal of pending final reports in the criminal cases;

iv) Action plan/proposed plan, if any, prepared/adopted by the learned District and Sessions Judges for disposal of the final reports pending before them.

The matter has now been listed for August 20, 2026, along with the compiled reports received from across the State.

Advocate Shreet Raj Jaiswal, assisted by Advocate Akash Verma, appeared for the applicants

Case title - Asit Verma and Another vs State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another

Click Here To Read/Download Order