Supreme Court Refuses Plea for Timely Delivery of Judgment; Calls It "Browbeating of High Court"

The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a plea alleging that no advocate is ready to mention before the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court for expeditious delivery of judgments pending pronouncement.

Calling the plea an attempt to browbeat the High Court, the Supreme Court's bench led by Justice BV Nagarathna said that the petitioner before it was at liberty to the petitioner to follow the guidelines laid down by the court in Peela Pahan vs State of Jharkhand wherein the Supreme Court has laid down guidelines to ensure timely pronouncement of high court judgments after they are reserved. 

"This is just browbeating the High court," Justice Joymalya Bagchi told the petitioner adding that as he himself was a lawyer and could approach the High court. "You are also a lawyer. Please don't think the Indian bar is divided into territories. You can also approach the High court," Justice Bagchi added.

When the counsel sought permission to appear virtually, Justice Bagchi said, "Write a letter to the chief justice... Such observations will only mean that we are saying HC does not have online hearing facility. Easy to say all this across the bar...".

Notably, a CJI Surya Kant led bench recently ordered that High Courts are to pronounce reasoned judgments within three months of reserving judgment. "Matters of personal liberty, like bail application, orders to be passed ideally by next day. Bail orders to be communicated to jail authorities so that undertrial can be released same day of bail or maximum the next day," the bench had further ordered.

In cases where judgments are not pronounced within 3 months of being reserved, Supreme Court had asked the registrar general to place it before the Chief Justice, and Chief Justice of the High Court may give another 2 weeks. If still not complied, then the case to be allocated to another bench, the top court has said.

Additionally, the high court have been requested to update their websites so that when reasoned order is uploaded a SMS should be sent to the persons concerned. With a view to increase transparency, the supreme court has said, the details of on which date the judgment was reserved, pronounced and uploaded shall also be reflected on the websites.

Case Title: RAHUL KUMAR Vs HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Bench: Justices Nagarathna and Bagchi

Hearing Date: June 25, 2026