The Supreme Court on Tuesday described the practice of high courts reserving judgments for months without making them public as an “identifiable ailment” that must be eradicated, stressing the urgent need to ensure timely delivery of justice.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi was hearing a plea alleging that the Jharkhand High Court had orally pronounced a judgment dismissing a petition on December 4 last year, but the written verdict had not yet been uploaded.
Taking note of the grievance, the bench directed that a complete copy of the judgment be provided to the counsel by the end of next week.
Appearing for the litigant, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi termed the delay as “playing with the majesty of law,” arguing that such conduct amounted to little more than lip service to judicial responsibility.
The Chief Justice observed that there were broadly two categories of judges—those who reserve judgments but eventually pronounce them, and those who delay delivery indefinitely. “This is a challenge before the judiciary. It is an identifiable ailment. It has to be treated and eradicated and cannot be allowed to spread,” he said, underlining that the problem was systemic rather than personal.
