The Supreme Court expressed concern over the Allahabad High Court taking 40 years to decide a murder convict’s criminal appeal, describing the delay as troubling. The Court cautioned that shortcuts to clear long-pending cases could harm public interest and deny fair hearings
The Supreme Court has raised concerns about the extraordinary delay by the Allahabad High Court in disposing of a criminal appeal that had been pending for 40 years.
The appeal was filed by a murder convict challenging his conviction.
On Monday, June 8, 2026, a partial working day Bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and A.S. Chandurkar described the situation as disturbing.
The Bench questioned what effective and innovative steps could be taken to address the rising pendency that continues to obstruct timely justice delivery in the Allahabad High Court.
The matter involved Vijay Singh, who was 28 years old when he was arrested in November 1983 for allegedly shooting his brother dead. A sessions court in Kanpur convicted him of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment in December 1985.
Singh then challenged the conviction before the Allahabad High Court. However, his appeal remained pending for nearly 41 years, only to be dismissed through a 20-page judgment delivered on February 9, 2026.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court noted that Singh had spent only about three months in custody. It further observed that he remained on bail for nearly 43 years while awaiting the outcome of his appeal.
The court decided to continue his bail during the pendency of the proceedings before it.
The Bench also expressed concern over repeated instances of prolonged delays in the Allahabad High Court. It remarked that litigants often approach the Supreme Court seeking directions for expeditious hearings due to the heavy backlog in the Allahabad High Court.
Justice Mishra sought suggestions from senior advocate Siddharth Dave and advocate Zoheb Hossain regarding possible measures to speed up the disposal of long-pending cases. Mr. Dave suggested that prosecution appeals pending for more than three decades could be dismissed to help reduce the backlog.
However, the Bench rejected this proposal, observing that the core principles of adjudication do not allow cases to be dismissed merely because of prolonged pendency.
The Bench cautioned that such a method could harm public interest and deny parties a fair opportunity to present their case.
In his appeal before the Supreme Court, Singh stressed the extent of the delay, stating that he is now 72 years old and has spent his youth, middle age, and old age under the shadow of a criminal conviction.
Adding that his criminal appeal had languished before the High Court for 40 years before being finally heard and dismissed, the plea said,
“For over four decades, through youth, middle age, and now old age, he has lived under the shadow of that conviction,”