The Supreme Court of India has approved a new SOP to eliminate long delays in filing legal aid appeals and SLPs. Strict timelines, digital tracking, and monitoring committees aim to ensure faster access to justice for convicts.
The Supreme Court of India has taken a major step to fix long delays faced by prisoners who depend on legal aid to file appeals and Special Leave Petitions (SLPs). In an important judgment delivered by Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, the Court approved a detailed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to ensure faster filing of such cases and better coordination between courts and authorities.
The Court clearly said that delays in legal aid matters are unacceptable, especially when they affect the rights of convicts. It stressed that providing legal aid is not just a service, but a constitutional duty connected to the idea of justice for all under the Preamble, as well as Article 39A of the Constitution.
This case started when Shankar Mahto challenged his death sentence, which had been confirmed by the Patna High Court in 2014. While hearing the matter in 2017, the Supreme Court noticed that there were serious delays in filing appeals in legal aid cases.
To understand the issue better, the Court appointed Senior Advocate Vibha Datta Makhija as amicus curiae. Over time, the Court worked closely with different stakeholders like the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee (SCLSC), National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), and State Governments.
An important affidavit filed in July 2025 highlighted several problems in the system. It pointed out that there was no proper system to track delays in filing cases and that panel lawyers were not communicating updates on time after being assigned cases. These gaps were affecting the speed and efficiency of justice delivery.
While analysing the concept of legal aid, the Court explained that access to justice must be meaningful and not just on paper. It observed,
“Legal aid contributes directly to this goal by enabling disadvantaged individuals to assert their rights and seek remedies against injustice… Articles 21, 39A, and 142 of the Constitution of India, ensuring access to justice for all legal aid beneficiaries.”
The Court also referred to important past judgments to support its reasoning. It mentioned Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration to highlight that prisoners do not lose their fundamental rights. It also discussed Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, where it was held that
“speedy trial to be a facet of Article 21 and free legal aid is an essential component of fair, just and reasonable procedure in law.”
Additionally, the Court referred to the 2024 decision in Suhas Chakma v. Union of India, which addressed issues in legal aid for undertrial prisoners and promoted early access to justice.
Also Read: How SOP in Filing SLP Paper Books Benefits Legal Proceedings| Supreme Court
After detailed discussions, the Court introduced the new
“Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Translation and Transmission of Records for Filing Legal Aid Appeals and Special Leave Petitions (SLPs), 2025.”
This SOP divides cases into different categories based on urgency. Category A1 includes serious criminal cases like death penalty and life imprisonment. Category A2 includes urgent civil matters like eviction and child custody. Other cases fall under medium and normal priority.
The SOP sets strict timelines. In high-priority cases, legal services committees must get the convict’s consent within 15 days and assign translators within the next 15 days. It also focuses heavily on digital improvement. The National Informatics Centre (NIC) has been directed to build a common digital platform to connect the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Legal Services Committees, and jail authorities for smooth sharing of information.
The Court also highlighted the need to improve translation quality. It directed High Courts to strengthen their translation departments and ensure enough staff is appointed. It suggested that the number of translators should be at least one-third of the number of judges.
To make sure everything works properly, the Court ordered the creation of Monitoring Committees in both the Supreme Court and all High Courts. These committees will include senior advocates and officials who will review progress every week.
Importantly, the Court made it clear that the timelines mentioned in the SOP are not optional. They are binding and must be followed strictly. It also gave several clear directions. The NIC must develop the digital platform within two months.
Monitoring Committees must be set up within one month. A new checklist explaining reasons for delay must be added to all legal aid applications within two weeks. The Member Secretary of NALSA has been made the nodal officer to supervise and review the implementation of the SOP.
On the issue of poor translations, the Court made a strong observation:
“The poor quality of translation has engaged the attention of this Court, recently, on quite of few occasions, indicating that some sort of structural change is necessitated in this regard.”
Finally, the Court directed its Registrar (Judicial) to send the order to all High Courts so that Chief Justices and State Legal Services Authorities can take necessary steps to implement these changes.
This judgment is expected to significantly improve the legal aid system in India by reducing delays, improving coordination, and ensuring that even the most disadvantaged individuals get timely access to justice.
Click Here to Read More Reports On SLPs
