Tell lower courts to give priority to personal liberty cases: SC to HCs

NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Friday said any undue delay in deciding bail pleas is an injustice and violative of the accused's fundamental rights while setting a timeline of two months for trial and high courts to decide bail and anticipatory bail applications.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said liberty of citizens cannot be left in abeyance by keeping bail plea hanging for a long time and took strong objection to Bombay high court keeping an anticipatory bail plea pending for nearly six years.

"Applications concerning personal liberty can't be kept pending for years while applicants remain under a cloud of uncertainty. The consistent line...of this court makes it abundantly clear that bail and anticipatory pleas must be decided expeditiously without relegating the parties to a state of indefinite pendency. Prolonged delay not only frustrates the object of Code of Criminal Procedure but also amounts to denial of justice, contrary to constitutional ethos reflected in Articles 14 and 21 (relating to fundamental rights)," the bench said.



It directed the HCs to ensure that pleas for bail and anticipatory bail pending before them or before courts under their jurisdiction are disposed of expeditiously, preferably within two months from date of filing, except in cases where delay is attributable to the parties themselves.

It asked HCs to issue necessary administrative directions to subordinate courts to prioritise matters involving personal liberty and avoid indefinite adjournments.

"This court has consistently underscored, in a long line of decisions, that applications affecting personal liberty - particularly bail and anticipatory bail - ought not to be kept pending indefinitely. The grant or refusal of bail, anticipatory or otherwise, is ordinarily a straightforward exercise, turning on the facts of each case. There is, therefore, no justification for deferring decision-making and allowing a sword of Damocles to hang over the applicant's head. In matters concerning liberty, bail courts must be sensitive and ensure that constitutional ethos is upheld. While docket explosion remains a chronic challenge, cases involving personal liberty deserve precedence," the apex court said.

The court was hearing an appeal challenging Bombay HC's order rejecting anticipatory bail plea of an accused. The bail plea was filed in 2019 but the HC decided it in 2025. Though Supreme Court upheld the HC order, it criticised the HC for keeping the applications pending for six years.

"Being the highest constitutional fora in the states, high courts must devise suitable mechanisms and procedures to avoid accumulation of pending bail/anticipatory bail applications and ensure that the liberty of citizens is not left in abeyance," it said.

Select The Times of India as your preferred source on Google Search