IMTIYAZ AHMAD versus STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 1 S.C.R. 305 · Decided: 02-01-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Directions issued

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] I S.C.R. 305 
JMTIYAZ AHMAD 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. 
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 254-262of2012) 
JANUARY 02, 20 l 7 
[T.S. THAKUR, CJI, DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD AND 
L. NAGESWARA RAO, JJ.] 
Judiciary - Subordinate judiciary -Administration of justice -
Long delay in disposal of cases - Creation of new posts in district 
;udiciary -
Held: Report by Chairperson, National Court 
Management Systems Commillee (NCMSC) that in the long term, 
the judge strength of the district judiciary to be assessed by scientific 
method and in the interim, weighted disposal approach, suggested -
Acceptance of the approach by Union government - However, 
stipulations by Union government - First stipulation that' the High 
Courts must make available real time data on the pendency of various 
categories of cases accepted, however, the second stipulation that 
new posts should be created only after 90% of the sanctioned 
strength has been filled up, cannot be accepted - Filling up of 
vacancies in the district judiciary is an on-going process - Many 
of the delays are not in the control of the High Courts-Furthermore, 
it is necessary to provide for the required judge strength in every 
State district judiciary to facilitate the creation of infrastructure -
Hence, scientific assessment of the required judge strength would 
form the basis of ensuring that the State Governments put into place 
the infrastructure required fr» tackling judicial delays - Issuance 
of directions that until NCMSC formulates a scientific method for 
determining the required judge strength of the district judiciary, 
iudge strength to be compllled for each State, in accordance with 
the interim approach - Constitution of India. 
The cases were pending before the High Courts where 
proceedings were stayed at the stage of registration of FIR, 
investigation, framing of charges or during trial, in exercise of 
power conferred by Art. 226 of the Constitution or Sections 
397/482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This Court took 
judicial notice of long pendency of serious criminal cases like 
305 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
306 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] I S.C.R. 
murder, rape, kidnapping and dacoity, due to grant of stay orders 
by High Court. The Law Commission was requested to address 
on the· basis of a scientific study, the issue of setting up additional 
courts and providing additional infrastructure for ensuring access 
to justice and speedy disposal of cases. The Law Commission 
suggested rate disposal method to assess the judge strength 
required in the district judiciary to clear the backlog of cases as 
well as to ensure that a fresh backlog is not created. The 
Chairperson of National Court Management Systems Committee 
(NCMSC) expressing concern about the rate of disposal method, 
proposed an interim approach which augments the disposal rate 
method of the Law Commission with the prevailing unit system 
of the High Courts to attribute a weightage to cases based on 
their nature and complexity. Hence, the present matter. 
The Court: 
HELD: 1.1 The criticism that the rate of disposal method 
places an incentive on lower disposals in certain courts has its 
own limitations. A lower rate of disposal may not necessarily reflect 
upon the efficiency with which a judge has conducted the court. 
Trials are held up because of a paucity of public prosecutors. 
Witnesses cited by the State, particularly police personnel, remain 
absent on dates fixed for trial, resulting in delays. Service of 
summons is delayed because of the laxity of police. In several 
northern States, particularly, the State of UP soaring summer 
temperatures have in the absence of basic infrastructural facilities 
including continuous power supply resulted in the 
institutionalization of morning courts in several districts. The 
convenience of ordinary litigants and witnesses_ with limited 
resources, who travel from afar without proper means of 
transportation cannot be disregarded by the presiding judicial 
oQicer. The functioning of courts which lack even rudimentary 
infrastructure is affected, as a result. There are impediments 
faced by the district courts including strikes of lawyers and 
abstention from work for causes unrelated to the functioning of 
the judge or court concerned. The loss of mandays on account of 
such causes results in a wastage of productive judicial time. 
Hence, it would not be correct to assert that the rate of disposal 
method places an i

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.