NEW DELHI: A bureaucrat would have faced harsh music for not complying with SC’s order, but HCs of Allahabad, Punjab and Haryana, Kerala, Patna, Telangana, Gauhati and J&K and Ladakh got away lightly on Wednesday for not complying with the apex court’s May 5 order seeking details of time-lapses between reserving verdicts and pronouncement of verdicts.Learning from a writ petition by convicts in Jharkhand that HC had reserved verdict on their appeals against conviction for years without pronouncing verdicts, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi had on May 5 asked all HC registrars general to submit details of cases in which HC benches had reserved verdicts between Jan 31 and May 5 and in which judgments had not been pronounced.Finding that HCs are not heeding SC orders, CJI-designate Kant said, “Unfortunately these seven HCs have neither submitted the required report, nor have sought extension of time to file the required data. They have not even come forward to assist SC as no advocate is present before court on their behalf.”While directing the registrars general to compile the requisite data within two weeks and file it before SC, the bench said if it was not done, the registrars general would be required to be personally present before SC.Amicus curiae and advocate Fauzia Shakil was asked by the bench to give shape to a format which could be part of the HC websites that will display the time lapse between reserving verdict and pronouncing of judgment. “Let the public know how many verdicts have been reserved and the benches took how many days to pronounce the judgments. If the time lapses between these two events exceeds six months, then details should be uploaded on the website. Creating a window on HC website will show transparency and accountability of the judiciary to the public,” the bench said.
