The Supreme Court of India described the 23-year delay in a dowry death trial as very disturbing and painful, ordering a thorough inquiry into why the Rajasthan High Court allowed the case to remain pending for over two decades. The Court called this prolonged litigation an “eye-opener for all the High Courts across the country.”
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India described the 23-year delay in a dowry death trial as very disturbing and painful, mandating a thorough inquiry into why the Rajasthan High Court allowed the case to remain pending for over two decades.
A bench consisting of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan expressed deep concern during the hearing of a Special Leave Petition (Criminal) about the prolonged stay of a trial involving serious charges under Sections 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which has been stalled since 2003 due to an interim order.
The Court dismissed the accused’s petition at the outset but chose to keep the situation open for examination of the administrative failures that resulted in such extensive delays.
Background of the Case
The case revolves around the death of Deepa, who married the first petitioner, Vijay Kumar, on November 21, 2000. Deepa died under mysterious circumstances at her in-law’s home less than a year into the marriage on December 31, 2001.
An FIR (No. 5/2002) was registered on January 10, 2002, at the Nazirabad City Police Station, District Ajmer, following a complaint from her brother, Girish Goyal.
He alleged that his sister was subjected to dowry harassment and ultimately murdered by her husband, brother-in-law, father-in-law, mother-in-law, sister-in-law, and uncle-in-law, reportedly by poisoning her.
Following an investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against all seven individuals on August 2, 2002, and charges were framed by the Trial Court on November 15, 2002.
However, in January 2003, the petitioners contested the framing of charges, filing a Criminal Revision Petition (No. 38/2003) with the Rajasthan High Court, which subsequently stayed further trial proceedings on February 14, 2003.
The case remained inactive for nearly 20 years and was finally heard on August 24, 2023.
The High Court rejected the revision petition on August 1, 2025, leading the accused to approach the Supreme Court.
Represented by Advocate Mr. Abhishek Gupta, the petitioners challenged the High Court’s August 1, 2025, decision. The State of Rajasthan was represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma.
However, the Supreme Court found no merit in the petition, stating,
“We have no hesitation in dismissing this petition at the threshold, affirming that the High Court had not erred in its decision.“
While rejecting the petition on its merits, the Supreme Court shifted its attention to the procedural delay. The bench remarked that the situation was very disturbing and raised crucial questions regarding the 23-year pending Criminal Revision Petition linked to such a sensitive issue as dowry death.
The Court stated,
“If criminal trials in such serious offences remain pending for years together on the strength of interim orders passed by the High Courts, it would lead to nothing but mockery of justice. Justice has to be done with all the parties. Justice cannot be done only with the accused persons. Justice has to be done even with the victim and the family members of the victim. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
Several critical questions were put forward to the Rajasthan High Court Registry and the State Government:
- Why did it take 23 years for the High Court to hear the Criminal Revision Petition?
- Why was the case not dealt with earlier despite the ongoing interim relief?
- Why did the State of Rajasthan, as the prosecution, not take initiative during this long period?
The Supreme Court characterized this prolonged litigation as an “eye-opener for all the High Courts across the country.”
ALSO READ: Dowry Death? Dying Declaration Sends Mother-In-Law To Jail For Life: District Court
While dismissing the Special Leave Petition, the Supreme Court issued several directives to investigate the causes behind the delay:
- Production of Records: The Registrar General of the Rajasthan High Court is instructed to send all records, including order sheets, to the Supreme Court by a Special Messenger.
- Data on Pendency: The Registrar General must provide a breakdown of Criminal Revision Petitions filed in 2001 and how many were resolved between 2001 and 2026.
- Listing Details: The High Court is required to report how many times the petitioners’ revision petition was scheduled for hearing from its filing until its dismissal.
- Direction to High Courts: The Bench urged Chief Justices of all High Courts to ensure that petitions with interim orders delaying trials particularly in sensitive cases such as murder, rape, and dowry death are prioritized for immediate hearings.
The matter has been scheduled for a Part-Heard hearing on January 15, 2026, for further orders once the file is received.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Dowry
Case Title: Vijay Kumar & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan
Read Attachment
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
