The Supreme Court on Friday once again raised serious concerns over delays in the pronouncement of judgments by the Jharkhand High Court, highlighting a growing pattern of inordinate judicial delays. This time, the issue came to light in a case involving three home guard aspirants, whose writ petitions have remained undecided since April 2023 despite being reserved for judgment.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh expressed dismay after senior advocate Nikhil Goel informed the court that the Jharkhand High Court had last heard the matter on April 6, 2023, and orally indicated that it was reserving the verdict—but no judgment has been delivered to date.
“This appears to be a pattern. Judgments are not being pronounced after reserving orders,” Goel told the bench, pointing out that similar delays were flagged in an earlier case involving four life convicts.
The petitioners, represented by advocate Vanya Gupta, are among more than 70 aspirants who approached the High Court after the Jharkhand government cancelled recruitment for over 1,000 home guard positions advertised in 2017. Their names had figured in the merit list, and the matter had been under adjudication since 2021.
The Supreme Court took strong note of the ongoing issue, especially after perusing a report previously submitted by the registrar general of the Jharkhand High Court in another matter. That report only listed criminal cases and omitted civil matters, which the bench said was a clear misreading of its May 5 order. That order had sought details of all cases—civil and criminal—where arguments had concluded but judgments remained pending.
“The registrar general was expected to send a report with respect to the civil matters also, as clearly directed by the May 5 order… Be that as it may, a comprehensive report with respect to all the civil matters reserved by different benches be furnished,” the Supreme Court directed.
The apex court has now issued a formal notice to the registrar general of the Jharkhand High Court, asking for a complete report on all pending civil matters—particularly those where orders have been reserved but not pronounced—including the writ petitions filed by the three petitioners and others.
The case is now listed for further hearing on May 23.
This isn’t the first time the Jharkhand High Court has come under scrutiny. On May 5, during hearings in a case involving life convicts, the Supreme Court observed that judges of the Jharkhand High Court were taking breaks “unnecessarily” and even suggested performance audits. The convicts’ counsel, advocate Fauzia Shakil, had revealed that the high court had reserved the verdict on their appeal in 2022, but it was pronounced only after the apex court intervened.
The Supreme Court subsequently expanded the scope of the case and sought reports from all high courts on cases where verdicts had been reserved post-argument but not delivered. The court termed the issue one of “paramount importance” that “goes to the root of the criminal justice system” and scheduled the matter for a comprehensive hearing in July.
