SC flags 40-year delay by Allahabad HC in murder case, seeks solutions to judicial backlog
The Supreme Court has expressed concern over the extraordinary delay by the Allahabad High Court in disposing of a 40-year-old criminal appeal filed by a murder accused challenging his conviction.
A partial working day (PWD) bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and AS Chandurkar, on Monday, described the situation as disturbing and questioned what innovative measures could be adopted to address the mounting pendency that continues to clog the justice delivery system in the Allahabad High Court.
The case pertained to Vijay Singh, who was 28 years old when he was arrested in November 1983 for allegedly shooting his brother dead. A sessions court at Kanpur convicted him of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment in December 1985.
Singh challenged the verdict before the Allahabad High Court. However, his appeal remained pending for nearly 41 years before being dismissed by the high court through a 20-page judgment delivered on February 9 this year.
During the hearing, the top court noted that Singh had spent only about three months in custody and remained on bail for almost 43 years while awaiting the outcome of his appeal.
The court decided to continue his bail during the pendency of proceedings before it.
The bench voiced concern over the recurring issue of prolonged delays in the Allahabad High Court, observing that litigants frequently approach the top court seeking directions for expeditious hearings because of heavy pendency. Justice Mishra sought suggestions from senior advocate Siddharth Dave and advocate Zoheb Hossain on possible measures to accelerate the disposal of old cases. Dave suggested that prosecution appeals pending for more than three decades could be dismissed to reduce the backlog.
The bench, however, rejected the idea, observing that fundamental principles of adjudication do not permit dismissal of cases solely on account of prolonged pendency. The bench cautioned that such an approach could adversely affect public interest and deprive parties of an opportunity to present their case.
In his appeal before the top court, Singh highlighted the prolonged delay, stating that he is now 72 years old and has spent his youth, middle age and old age under the shadow of a criminal conviction.
“For over four decades, through youth, middle age, and now old age, he has lived under the shadow of that conviction,” the plea said, adding that his criminal appeal had languished before the high court for 40 years before being finally heard and dismissed.
