Supreme Court of India.
Supreme Court Raises Alarm Over Delay in Uploading Judgments by High Courts: New Delhi, September 9, 2025 — The Supreme Court has expressed grave concern over the persistent delays by High Courts in uploading detailed judgments on their websites, despite having pronounced the operative parts of the verdicts months or even years earlier. The apex court’s remarks came in a recent case, Rajan v. State of Haryana, highlighting the adverse impact such delays have on litigants seeking timely judicial redress.
A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Sandeep Mehta underlined that this growing trend of High Courts withholding the reasoned judgment for extended periods after delivering the operative portion of their verdicts deprived litigants of their right to seek timely justice. The Court added that it hoped no future case would involve such delays, especially once the operative part of a judgment has been pronounced.
Court Reiterates Previous Guidelines
The Supreme Court’s intervention comes as a reaffirmation of earlier directions laid down in the landmark case of Anil Rai v. State of Bihar (2001), where it had already decried the practice of High Courts delaying the upload of reasoned judgments. The bench observed that this practice had become a norm for some High Courts, and the Court had repeatedly pointed out its drawbacks in the past.
Justice Pardiwala and Justice Mehta were clear in their message: “Over time, it has been the practice of a few High Courts to pronounce the operative part of the order without the reasoned judgment, and after a substantial length of time, the reasoned judgment is uploaded. This practice has been deprecated by this Court in many of its judgments. We hope that we may not have to come across any matter wherein there is a delay at the end of the High Court in uploading the reasoned order, more particularly after the operative part of the judgment is pronounced.”
The Underlying Case: Rajan v. State of Haryana
The Supreme Court’s comments came while hearing a plea challenging a conviction upheld by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a 1998 murder case. The appellant, Rajan, had been convicted by the trial court, along with his co-accused, Vikas, for the murder of a man, while three other co-accused were acquitted. The charge was that Rajan had attempted to shoot the victim, but it was the other co-accused, Naresh and Vikas, who had ultimately killed the victim with firearms.
Rajan appealed the decision before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, but the court dismissed his appeal and upheld the conviction. Aggrieved by this, Rajan approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the delay of two years and five months in uploading the High Court’s reasoned judgment had caused serious prejudice to him, and that there was no firearm recovered from him to substantiate the charges.
Punjab & Haryana High Court.
Court’s Response on Delay and Evidence
While rejecting Rajan’s arguments regarding the delay and the non-recovery of the weapon, the Supreme Court expressed serious concern over the practice of delayed uploads of reasoned judgments. The bench remarked that a delay of over two years in uploading a judgment was “a matter of grave concern” and should not be overlooked.
However, the Court clarified that delay alone cannot be grounds to set aside a conviction unless it is shown that the delay caused significant prejudice to the appellant. In this case, despite the delay, the Court found that the oral testimony of the two eyewitnesses, which corroborated the events, was credible and consistent. The lack of a firearm recovery did not detract from the testimony’s reliability.
The Court further noted: “We have reached the conclusion that despite there being a delay of 2 years 5 months in uploading the judgment, the oral testimony of the two eyewitnesses inspires confidence and there is nothing on record in the form of any intrinsic evidence to render their testimony doubtful.”
Directive for All High Courts
In a bid to address the systemic issue of delayed uploads, the Court also ordered the circulation of its judgment to all High Courts, reiterating the need for compliance with the directions issued in Anil Rai to ensure that judgments are uploaded promptly after the operative part of the verdict is announced.
The Supreme Court’s decision has once again brought to the fore the issue of judicial delays, particularly in the digital age, where access to timely information and judgments is crucial for litigants, legal professionals, and the public.
READ: Madras High Court Mandates Sweeping Reforms to Tackle Decades of Delay in Criminal Trials
Legal and Public Implications
The Supreme Court’s intervention could have a significant impact on judicial transparency and accountability in India. With more and more cases being heard through digital platforms, delays in uploading reasoned judgments can create roadblocks for appeals, revision petitions, and general access to justice. The Court’s concern about the high-stakes consequences of such delays reinforces the need for a comprehensive overhaul of the process, especially in the face of growing digitization in India’s legal system.
As the legal community awaits the circulation of this judgment to the High Courts, the hope is that this will serve as a wake-up call for more timely and efficient uploading of judicial decisions, ensuring that litigants are not deprived of their fundamental right to seek timely judicial redress.
READ: Supreme Court Upholds Judicial Inquiry, Dismisses Justice Yashwant Varma’s Challenge
Key Takeaways:
Supreme Court flags delays in uploading detailed judgments by High Courts.
Concerns raised over the grave impact on litigants’ right to timely justice.
Court reiterates that delay in uploading judgments cannot, by itself, be a ground for setting aside convictions.
Directive issued to all High Courts to comply with earlier orders on prompt uploads.
Legal Representatives:
Appellant (Rajan): Advocates Vikas Sharma, Sunil Kumar
Respondent (State of Haryana): Advocate Anil Kumar Mehta
This ruling may prompt reforms in how judgments are made accessible to the public, setting a benchmark for judicial efficiency and transparency across India’s High Courts.
READ: Akshay Jeet Bhat and Prasad Subramanyan Launch First Principles Law
