A Supreme Court attempt to investigate a four-decade delay in a criminal trial led to an unexpected moment of institutional introspection, as it emerged that proceedings had effectively remained frozen for more than a decade because the original records, requested by the Supreme Court in 2013, were never returned.
A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe was hearing an appeal arising out of the conviction of a lawyer who was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment for tampering with court records in a land acquisition matter. What started as a routine investigation into excessive delay took an unusual turn when the bench was informed that the lower court could not proceed in the absence of the original records, which remained in the custody of the High Court.
The bench had, in February, sought a detailed explanation from the Registrar General of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on why the criminal trial, which began in 1983, remained inconclusive despite a specific directive from the Supreme Court in 2001 to complete the proceedings within six months. The court described the delay as “rather shocking” and stressed the need to explain the collapse that spanned four decades.
But the response that followed presented a strange situation. According to the report, the Supreme Court requested the original court record in July 2013 and was never returned, effectively halting the trial. In the absence of the original file, the court was unable to move forward, and judicial work in the case stopped completely.
The report also revealed that even before the records were sent to the Supreme Court, the case suffered from chronic delays. At one point, the file was reported to be “misplaced”, prompting rebuilding attempts. To further complicate matters, the list was not included for nearly nine years, from August 2017 to March 2026, due to what was described as an “inadvertent” failure by court staff to present it to a judge.
Taking into account these findings, the Supreme Court directed its Registry to verify the status of the records and ensure their immediate return to the trial court. It also ordered that the criminal case be pursued and disposed of expeditiously once the records are recovered.
The case itself arises from allegations dating back to the early 1980s that certified copies of judicial records had been manipulated to overcome limitations barriers in land tenure appeals. While contempt proceedings were initiated simultaneously, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, as early as 1983, decided to postpone them until the criminal trial was over.
However, in a departure from this approach, in 2008 the Supreme Court proceeded to decide the contempt case and convicted the lawyer, although the criminal trial remained pending.
But the Supreme Court found this course untenable. Regardless of the conviction and sentence, the bench held that the issues relating to contempt and criminal proceedings are closely related and based on the same set of facts. The report noted that proceeding with a contempt of court ruling while the criminal trial remains unresolved creates the possibility of contradictory results, especially if the accused in the criminal case is acquitted.
“The fact of whether the appellant was implicated… is common to both proceedings,” the court noted in its final order, warning that a conviction for contempt in such circumstances could become “inappropriate” if the criminal case had ended differently.
