Supreme Court Pushes for Mandatory Disclosure of Judgment Delivery Timelines by High Courts

Context:

• The Supreme Court of India directed all High Courts to publicly disclose the time taken by judges to deliver verdicts after reserving judgments.

• The directive emerged during a hearing on a plea by four life convicts, whose appeals had remained pending for 2–3 years in the Jharkhand High Court despite completion of hearings.

• The move aims to strengthen judicial transparency and accountability, particularly in cases involving reserved judgments.

Key Highlights:

Judicial Directive & Scope

• High Courts must disclose:

  • Date of reservation of judgment

  • Date of pronouncement

  • Date of uploading on official websites

• The disclosure applies to judgments:

  • Reserved after January 31, 2025

  • Pronounced up to October 31, 2025

• High Courts were asked to report:

  • Existing mechanisms for public disclosure

  • Views on creating a uniform national framework

Rationale & Observations

• Conventional judicial practice expects judgments to be delivered within a reasonable time, generally 2–6 months after reservation.

• Justice Surya Kant (CJI-designate) emphasized that:

  • Public confidence in the judiciary depends on transparency.

  • Judicial functioning must meet legitimate public expectations.

• Justice Dipankar Datta Bagchi suggested:

  • Creation of a public dashboard on High Court websites showing judgment timelines.

Concerns & Safeguards

• The Supreme Court acknowledged:

  • Possible adverse consequences, such as pressure on judges.

• High Courts were invited to:

  • Express apprehensions or administrative constraints

  • Suggest safeguards while ensuring transparency.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Transparency: Open access to judicial information to enhance trust.

• Accountability: Institutional responsibility for delays in justice delivery.

• Judicial Functioning: Efficiency and procedural fairness in court administration.

UPSC Relevance (GS-wise):

GS 2 – Polity & Constitution

• Judicial accountability vs. judicial independence

• Article 21: Right to speedy justice

GS 2 – Governance

• Transparency in public institutions

• Use of digital dashboards for institutional accountability

Prelims Focus:

• Reserved judgments

• Judicial transparency mechanisms

• Supreme Court’s supervisory role over High Courts

Mains Enrichment:

• Analyze how transparency reforms can improve judicial efficiency without undermining independence.

• Discuss pendency and delayed judgments as a governance challenge in India.