Representative image NEW DELHI: In a bid to curb the “reserve and forget” habit among some high court judges, Supreme Court on Friday mandated a three month deadline for HCs to pronounce their verdicts, while also laying down that orders in bail cases must be passed immediately.After coming across a series of appeals against convictions in criminal cases languishing indefinitely, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said HCs must display extra promptitude in deciding matters concerning personal liberty, regular and anticipatory bail.CJI Kant said, “Bail applications should be heard, and the order should preferably be pronounced and uploaded the same day. If it is reserved, it should be pronounced the next day and uploaded to the website.”Mere prompt pronouncement of the order granting bail would no longer be sufficient as SC mandated that it must also be communicated to the jail authorities with equal promptness to ensure that the undertrial/convict is released from custody immediately, preferably the same day or certainly by the next day, unless s/he was required to be kept behind bars in other cases or for failure to furnish the bail bonds.SC asked the trial courts concerned to report compliance of the bail order to their high courts.However, SC gave some leeway to HCs and said if a bench was of the opinion that delivering a reasoned judgment would take time in cases where an order was required urgently, it could pronounce the operative part immediately and follow it up in the next 15 days. However, it said HCs must upload all verdicts within 24 hours of pronouncement.CJI Kant and Justice Bagchi said the HC registry must give a monthly report on the number of judgments reserved to the chief justice, who could confidentially notify the judges concerned about cases in which judgments had been reserved for two months.If the judge or bench concerned failed to pronounce the verdict in three months, the HC CJ would request them to do so in the next two weeks, failing which the case could be assigned to another judge/bench for a fresh hearing and a prompt decision, SC said, while accepting or modulating many of the suggestions given by amicus curiae Fauzia Shakil.Apart from the steps to be taken by the CJ, SC gave liberty to the parties in such situations to file applications to assign their cases to another bench. It said every judgment must mention the date on which the verdict was reserved.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosTechnical Glitch Or Governance Failure: Who Is Accountable For Tourist Safety Disasters?Congress Eyes “Kerala Model” For Karnataka Cabinet Amid Siddaramaiah Exit Buzz“Some People Trying To Misuse CID”: Kunal Ghosh Questions Agency Visit To His HomeSupreme Court Pulls Up NTA Over NEET 2026 Leak | Centre Says PM Modi Supervising Reforms’No Need To Sing Vande Matram In…’ Pinarayi Vijayan Hits out at Centre, BJP After Row In Assembly₹1,000 Crore for Damage Control: The Real Cost of India’s Exam CrisisWhy Japan Banned Indian Mango Shipments, Alphonso & Kesar Exports Face Major Crisis?335 Detainees Held As Bengal Activates Holding Centres Under Detect Delete Deport PolicyCyprus Plans BrahMos Missile Purchase From India, Raising Security Concerns In TurkeySupreme Court Allows Vinesh Phogat To Participate In Asian Games Trials123PhotostoriesHow to make Mushroom Oats Omelette for summer breakfast5 Snakes that love British gardensBefore Vaibhav Sooryavanshi: 7 sports child wonderkids who changed historyMeghan Markle’s favourite summer fashion picks just got a massive price dropFrom ‘National Treasure’ to ‘Longlegs’: Top 5 Nicolas Cage movies you need to watch right nowPoha turns mushy and soggy? 4 common mistakes that people commit and easy fixes7 foods linked to healthy aging and longevityThis is where snakes hide in Australian homesWhy scientists are telling anemic women to drink this juice5 stunning looks of Tejasswi Prakash from ‘Desi Bling’ that broke the internet123Hot PicksDhanendra KumarNew Labour CodeCOMEDK UGET resultCBSE 12th re-evaluationPunjab election resultStrait of HormuzGold price predictionTop TrendingBenjamin NetanyahuD GukeshVaibhav sooryavanshi IPL auctionPunjab Local Body Election ResultCockroach Janta PartySupreme CourtNEET UG 2026 fee refundBSEB Bihar Sakashmta Pariksha Admit CardNTANEET Paper Leak
NEW DELHI: In a bid to curb the “reserve and forget” habit among some high court judges, Supreme Court on Friday mandated a three month deadline for HCs to pronounce their verdicts, while also laying down that orders in bail cases must be passed immediately.After coming across a series of appeals against convictions in criminal cases languishing indefinitely, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said HCs must display extra promptitude in deciding matters concerning personal liberty, regular and anticipatory bail.CJI Kant said, “Bail applications should be heard, and the order should preferably be pronounced and uploaded the same day. If it is reserved, it should be pronounced the next day and uploaded to the website.”Mere prompt pronouncement of the order granting bail would no longer be sufficient as SC mandated that it must also be communicated to the jail authorities with equal promptness to ensure that the undertrial/convict is released from custody immediately, preferably the same day or certainly by the next day, unless s/he was required to be kept behind bars in other cases or for failure to furnish the bail bonds.SC asked the trial courts concerned to report compliance of the bail order to their high courts.However, SC gave some leeway to HCs and said if a bench was of the opinion that delivering a reasoned judgment would take time in cases where an order was required urgently, it could pronounce the operative part immediately and follow it up in the next 15 days. However, it said HCs must upload all verdicts within 24 hours of pronouncement.CJI Kant and Justice Bagchi said the HC registry must give a monthly report on the number of judgments reserved to the chief justice, who could confidentially notify the judges concerned about cases in which judgments had been reserved for two months.If the judge or bench concerned failed to pronounce the verdict in three months, the HC CJ would request them to do so in the next two weeks, failing which the case could be assigned to another judge/bench for a fresh hearing and a prompt decision, SC said, while accepting or modulating many of the suggestions given by amicus curiae Fauzia Shakil.Apart from the steps to be taken by the CJ, SC gave liberty to the parties in such situations to file applications to assign their cases to another bench. It said every judgment must mention the date on which the verdict was reserved.
