22 Years for Murder Trial, 22 More for Appeal: Supreme Court Alarmed by Four-Decade Delay, Seeks Report from Chhattisgarh High Court
Expressing deep concern over an extraordinary delay that has kept a murder case pending for more than four decades, the Supreme Court has questioned the functioning of the criminal justice system after finding that the trial itself took 22 years to conclude and the criminal appeal has remained pending for another 22 years before the High Court. Calling the situation “disturbing,” the Court sought a detailed report from the Registrar General of the Chhattisgarh High Court on the status of the appeal and the reasons for the prolonged delay.
A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan observed that such extraordinary delays strike at the very foundation of the constitutional guarantee of a speedy trial under Article 21. The Court remarked that when an accused spends decades waiting for both the trial and the appeal to conclude, the administration of criminal justice itself comes under serious question.
The case pertains to a murder prosecution in which the trial remained pending for nearly 22 years before the trial court finally delivered its verdict. However, the delay did not end there. The convicted persons’ appeal has continued to remain pending before the Chhattisgarh High Court for another 22 years, resulting in a total pendency of approximately 44 years since the criminal proceedings began.
Expressing its dissatisfaction, the Supreme Court directed the Registrar General of the Chhattisgarh High Court to furnish a comprehensive report explaining why the appeal has not been disposed of despite the passage of more than two decades. The Bench also sought details regarding the listing history of the case, the reasons for repeated adjournments, and the present status of the appeal.
The Court observed that prolonged delays in deciding criminal appeals not only affect the rights of the accused but also deny closure to victims’ families. It reiterated that the constitutional promise of speedy justice extends beyond investigation and trial and encompasses appellate proceedings as well. Justice delayed at any stage, the Bench noted, risks eroding public confidence in the judicial system.
The Supreme Court has in recent months repeatedly expressed concern over mounting judicial delays in criminal cases. In several matters involving prolonged investigations, delayed trials and long-pending appeals, it has emphasized that constitutional courts cannot remain passive spectators where systemic delays effectively defeat the administration of justice.
The latest order is expected to intensify scrutiny of long-pending criminal appeals across High Courts and may prompt administrative measures to identify and prioritize decades-old cases. Legal experts believe the Supreme Court’s intervention signals a renewed focus on ensuring that the constitutional right to speedy justice is not rendered meaningless by prolonged judicial delays.
