The Delhi High Court has expressed “serious concern” over systemic delays by the state in filing criminal appeals and revisions, warning that procedural lapses driven by bureaucratic inefficiency threaten the integrity of the criminal justice system and erode victims’ faith in it.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, in a sharply worded order passed on July 4, observed that while courts may condone delays in appropriate cases, such leniency “cannot become a shield for systemic apathy or bureaucratic inefficiency.”
The observation came while the court was hearing a petition by the Delhi government seeking condonation of a 325-day delay in filing a revision plea against a trial court order. The trial court had discharged an accused in a case involving culpable homicide not amounting to murder under the Indian Penal Code, along with charges under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The state’s counsel attributed the delay to routine administrative formalities and the movement of the file between departments. He argued that the delay was unintentional and urged the court to condone it in the interest of justice. The accused opposed this plea.
While the court ultimately allowed the state’s application, it issued a stern warning, saying such repeated lapses were not minor technical issues but serious setbacks to the administration of justice — especially for victims from marginalised and economically weaker sections who depend on the state for legal recourse.
“When the State delays in challenging orders which may adversely affect the victim’s case, such as an order of discharge, it is not merely a procedural lapse but a setback to the victim’s pursuit of justice,” the court noted. These delays, it added, “jeopardise the victim’s right to a fair and complete adjudication of allegations.”
In a significant move aimed at institutional reform, the court directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Director of Prosecution of the Delhi government. The official has been tasked with reviewing the circumstances leading to such delays and implementing measures to prevent recurrence.
The court also directed the state to formulate an appropriate policy ensuring that every stakeholder — from investigating officers and prosecutors to administrative departments — performs their duties within a clearly defined timeframe. The policy is to be placed before the court within one month of receiving the order.
