The Supreme Court of India on September 23, 2025, dismissed a special leave petition seeking the cancellation of bail, ruling that the plea had become infructuous after the High Court of Judicature at Madras quashed the underlying criminal prosecution. A division bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi also took serious note of a significant delay in the listing of the matter and directed the Registrar (Judicial) to conduct an inquiry.
Background of the Case
The matter before the Supreme Court was a Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 3832 of 2022, filed by the original complainant in a sexual offence case. The identity of the petitioner has been withheld in compliance with Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code. The petition challenged the final judgment and order of the Madras High Court dated July 7, 2021, and sought the cancellation of bail granted to the accused.
The Supreme Court had issued notice in the matter on May 13, 2022, with a specific direction to its Registry to “list this matter immediately after service is complete to the respondents.” According to the official record, service was completed on the State of Tamil Nadu (Respondent No. 1) and the accused (Respondent No. 2) on May 30, 2022.
Arguments of the Parties
During the hearing on September 23, 2025, counsel appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu submitted that the High Court had quashed the prosecution itself on account of a settlement between the parties. Consequently, the State argued that the special leave petition seeking cancellation of bail had been rendered infructuous.
This position was opposed by the counsel for the petitioner. However, when the bench inquired whether the petitioner had filed a separate petition before the Supreme Court to challenge the High Court’s order quashing the proceedings, the counsel “declined of taking any recourse.”
Court’s Analysis and Decision
The bench, after hearing the submissions, observed that its hands were tied due to the quashment of the First Information Report (FIR). With the primary criminal case no longer in existence, the ancillary issue of bail cancellation could not be adjudicated.
In its order, the Court stated, “Considering the aforesaid, at present we have no option except to dismiss the present special leave petition seeking cancellation of bail filed by the complainant because of the quashment of the FIR itself.”
Accordingly, the special leave petition was dismissed, and any pending applications were disposed of.
Inquiry Ordered into “Disturbing Factor” of Delay
While dismissing the petition, the Court highlighted a “disturbing factor” concerning the procedural delay in listing the case. The bench noted its explicit order from May 13, 2022, for immediate listing after service, yet the matter was not listed for over three years.
The order read: “As per the office report, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were served on 30.05.2022. Even thereafter, the case is not listed by the Registry.”
Expressing displeasure over this lapse, the Court directed a formal inquiry. “The Registrar (Judicial) to hold an enquiry and submit a report in Chambers why the case was not listed for more than three years and three months despite the specific order of this Court and who is responsible for the same,” the bench ordered. The Court has mandated that the report be made available in chambers within two weeks.
