45-Year Delay A 'Judicial System Failure': Supreme Court Grants Bail In 1981 Double Murder Case

Highlighting severe systemic delays within the criminal justice process, the Supreme Court of India termed a 45-year-long legal ordeal in a 1981 double murder case a clear "failure of the judicial system." A division bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran stayed the sentence of the sole surviving convict—now over 70 years old and bedridden—granting him immediate bail after both the trial court and the Jharkhand High Court took 22 years each to conclude their respective proceedings.

45 Years Of Litigation Leaves Five Accused Dead And One Bedridden

The case traces back to a double murder that occurred in 1981. The trial court took an extraordinary 22 years to deliver its conviction verdict in 2002, following which the statutory appeal remained pending before the High Court for another 22 years before being dismissed. Over the course of this protracted timeline, five out of the six accused passed away, leaving the sole remaining appellant, who is currently hospitalized under judicial custody, to pursue relief before the apex court.

Supreme Court Questions Inordinate Delays In Criminal Trials

Expressing profound concern, the bench noted that despite the heinous nature of the original crime, the court cannot overlook the immense suffering endured by an accused over four and a half decades. Addressing submissions made by advocate Faizia Shakeel regarding the irreparable harm of continued incarceration, the court ordered the convict's immediate release on personal surety. The bench observed that while administrative reports cited a period where the accused absconded, no adequate justification was provided for the 12-year lapse between the framing of charges in 1991 and the eventual conviction in 2002.

Central Government Impleaded Over Pendency Of Criminal Appeals

Taking broader note of systemic backlogs in the judiciary, the Supreme Court decided to examine the underlying causes behind such extreme delays in criminal appeals. To address structural concerns surrounding pendency across high courts, the bench permitted the impleadment of the Central Government and directed counsel to serve copies of the compliance affidavits to the office of the Attorney General or Solicitor General for further examination.