Supreme Court Again Flags “Inexplicable And Huge Delay” In Trials In Maharashtra

The Supreme Court once again expressed concern over inexplicable delays in trials in Maharashtra.

“One factor, which has seriously made the Court concerned, is the fact that repeatedly, it has been noticing inexplicable and huge delay in trial being conducted, especially, by the State of Maharashtra”, the Court said.

A bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice R Mahadevan issued notice in a bail plea and sought a personally affirmed affidavit from the Commissioner of Police, Nashik explaining delay in the conduct of the trial in a case registered in June 2019.

Criticizing the prosecution, the Court noted that despite the FIR being registered in June 2019, only one witness has been examined so far.

“In the present case, the FIR is of June, 2019 and still, in the trial, only one witness having been examined, speaks volumes of the conduct of the prosecution”, the Court stated.

The Court directed the Commissioner of Police, Nashik, to explain in detail the circumstances under which the trial has not progressed and to set out the role of each of the accused persons in relation to the delay.

The Court listed the matter on April 10, 2026.

The Supreme Court has on various occasions expressed concerns over delay in trials in Maharashtra. The Court described the situation in the State's criminal courts as a “shocking state of affairs”, noting that hundreds of cases were pending at the stage of framing of charges, with some dating back to 2006.

It also expressed displeasure in a case where an undertrial remained in custody for four years without charges being framed, and issued directions to ensure that trials are not delayed due to non-production of accused persons.

The Court has also earlier pointed to delays in trials under special statutes such as the MCOCA and UAPA and emphasised the need for dedicated courts to deal with such cases.

Background

The Bombay High Court last month rejected the petitioner's bail plea in a case arising from a June 14, 2019 incident in which the accused and co-accused allegedly entered a Muthoot Finance office in Nashik with firearms, looted gold, and shot dead an employee who resisted.

The defence cited delay in conducting the test identification parade after the accused's arrest on June 25, 2019, prolonged custody of over six years, and minimal trial progress with only one witness examined.

The State opposed bail relying on recovery of the firearm, ballistic match with bullets recovered from the spot and the deceased's body, CCTV footage, identification in the parade, a confessional statement, and the accused's three criminal antecedents, while attributing trial delay to non-cooperation by the accused and co-accused.

The High Court rejected the application holding that the allegations were serious and supported by direct evidence.

Case no. – Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4152/2026

Case Title – Parmendra @ Gauravsing Rajendra Sinha v. State of Maharashtra