The Supreme Court on Monday proposed that all high courts set external timelines for disposing of bail applications, laying out a wide range of recommendations aimed at ensuring speedy hearings in matters relating to personal liberty while balancing the rights of victims with the interests of the investigation.
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalia Bagchi explained that the measures proposed by them are intended to serve as institutional guidelines for high courts to develop their own mechanisms, keeping in mind local requirements and the overarching constitutional imperative to protect liberty while balancing the rights of victims.
While considering a matter relating to delay in disposal of bail applications before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the bench stressed that high courts and investigating agencies must adopt a “cooperative approach” to ensure timely disposal of bail applications without compromising the rights of victims.
“High courts and investigating agencies must adopt a collaborative approach to ensure timely disposal of bail applications without affecting the rights of victims,” the bench observed.
The court suggested that the High Courts should consider setting external timelines for disposal of bail petitions and develop regular listing practices so that liberty petitions do not remain pending indefinitely. It also urged the courts to discourage routine postponements sought by federal or state governments.
“The practice should be evolved so as not to grant informal adjournments to the Union or the states to remind them of the solemn duty of the court to protect fundamental rights,” the bench said.
In its recommendations, the court said that high courts may institutionalize weekly or fortnightly listing of bail matters, including a mechanism for automatic re-listing once every two weeks when matters are not taken up. It also noted that new bail applications should usually be submitted either on alternate days or within a week of their submission.
In an effort to reduce delays at the threshold stage itself, the bench recommended that status reports should be submitted before the first hearing, and that counsel representing accused persons should submit advance copies of bail petitions to the Public Prosecutor’s Office or designated state authorities. It also noted that the current practice in many High Courts of issuing formal notice at the admission stage in relation to bail matters could be dispensed with to expedite hearings.
The court’s observations came against the backdrop of growing concern over the prolonged confinement of under-trial prisoners and repeated postponement of bail proceedings across high courts.
In February this year, the bench expressed “extreme disappointment” at the delay in bail adjudication and anticipatory bail applications, noting that several matters relating to personal liberty had been postponed for several months together. At that stage, the court urged the chief justices of the Supreme Court to develop time-bound mechanisms for deciding such appeals.
On Monday, the bench also addressed procedural bottlenecks arising from delays in forensic reports, particularly in prosecutions under special laws such as the NDPS Act. “The chief justices must engage with the state so that the FSL reports are delivered within a reasonable period of time,” the bench said.
At the same time, the Court stressed the importance of victim participation in criminal proceedings, particularly in victim-centred crimes. “The victim has the right to be heard at every stage, including the accused’s application for bail,” the court noted, noting that investigating officers must ensure that victims are informed and able to benefit from legal representation, including legal assistance when necessary.
