Supreme Court reiterates guidelines to curb judicial delays in the Ravindra Pratap Shahi vs State of U.P. case, 2025.
SC REITERATES GUIDELINES ON JUDICIAL DELAY IN RAVINDRA PRATAP SHAHI CASE 2025
CASE SUMMARY – The Supreme Court in Ravindra Pratap Shahi vs State of U.P. & Ors. addressed the long-pending criminal appeal reserved by the Allahabad High Court since December 2021 but left undecided. The Court strongly criticized the delay, noting its adverse impact on litigants’ faith in the judicial process. Citing Anil Rai v. State of Bihar (2001) and subsequent rulings, the Court reiterated mandatory guidelines for timely pronouncement of judgments. Additional directions were issued to Registrar Generals of High Courts to monitor, report, and escalate cases of delay. The matter was disposed of with instructions for strict compliance across all High Courts.
| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Ravindra Pratap Shahi vs State of U.P. & Ors. |
| Introduction | The appeals arose against interim orders of the Allahabad High Court regarding a long-pending criminal appeal reserved for judgment but never pronounced. |
| Factual Background | Respondent No.2’s criminal appeal (since 2008) was reserved for judgment on 24.12.2021, but no verdict was delivered. Despite repeated requests and directions, the case remained undecided. |
| Legal Issues | Whether undue delay in pronouncement of judgments by High Courts violates the principles of speedy justice and erodes judicial faith. |
| Applicable Law | Guidelines from Anil Rai v. State of Bihar (2001) 7 SCC 318, CPC, CrPC principles, and judicial precedents on delayed pronouncement. |
| Analysis | The Supreme Court criticized inordinate delay, cited earlier rulings condemning similar situations, and reiterated guidelines ensuring timely judgments. |
| Conclusion | SC reiterated Anil Rai directions, added new compliance measures, and mandated High Courts’ Registrar Generals to track and escalate delayed judgments. |
| Current Scenario | Case disposed of on 25.08.2025; directions circulated to all High Courts to prevent delays in pronouncement of judgments. |
“Delay in pronouncement of judgments defeats the ends of justice and shakes public faith in the judiciary.”
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
READ ALSO – SC UPHOLDS NGT RULING ON ILLEGAL SAND MINING IN JAMMU & KASHMIR
