The Supreme Court of India on Monday issued directives to the High Courts (HCs) across India, mandating expedited disposal of bail applications. A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, expressed concern over persisting delays in hearings pertaining to bail cases, particularly flagging the mounting pendency in Allahabad and Patna HCs. It observed that prolonged pendency in such cases undermines the fundamental right to personal liberty.

Alarming backlogs observed in certain jurisdictions

While the Apex Court acknowledged that most HCs had furnished data on pending bail applications and had begun with corrective measures, it outlined ‘alarming’ backlogs in certain jurisdictions. It specifically referred to the Allahabad HC, noting that pendency remained excessively high despite judges hearing hundreds of cases on a daily basis. 

CJI Kant remarked that the Patna and Allahabad HCs were ‘most problematic’ in this regard, though he clarified that the observations were not intended to criticise them, but aimed at improving systemic efficiency. 

Key directives issued to streamline bail hearings

With the goal to achieve procedural reform, the Apex Court directed all HCs to list bail applications either weekly or fortnightly. It also proposed an automatic relisting mechanism, ensuring that cases which have not been heard are listed again within two weeks. 

Significantly, the Court ordered that fresh bail pleas should ordinarily be listed within one week of filing or on alternate days, resulting in reduction of waiting periods for undertrial applicants. Furthermore, it mandated that status reports must be filed prior to the first hearing. 

Additionally, legal counsel will now be required to serve copies of bail applications to the office of the Advocate General or any designated authority, ensuring timely responses from the state. 

SC flags delays in forensic reports

Beyond judicial procedures, the SC flagged delays in arrivals of forensic reports despite the nationwide expansion of forensic science laboratories worldwide. It directed the CJs of all the HCs to engage with state authorities to ensure such reports are submitted in time. 

In victim-centric cases, it underscored the responsibility of the investigating officers, cautioning that lapses in probe could ultimately strengthen the case for granting bail. Concluding its statements, the Bench said that courts and investigative agencies must work in consonance to ensure swift justice while upholding both the rights of the accused and the interests of the victims.