State's Delay In Filing Appeals In Serious Criminal Offences Prejudices Victim's Right To Fair Adjudication: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that State's delay in filing appeals in serious criminal offences prejudices the victim's right to fair adjudication of allegations, especially where the victim comes from marginalized or economically weaker sections of society.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that Courts must remain sensitive to the said factor while adjudicating applications for condonation of delay in criminal cases involving serious offences.

“…Victims, particularly those belonging to marginalized or economically weaker sections of society, often lack the means or resources to pursue independent legal remedies and instead rely on the State machinery to seek justice on their behalf,” the Court said.

It added: “When the State delays in challenging orders which may adversely affect the victim's case, such as an order of discharge, it is not merely a procedural lapse but a setback to the victim's pursuit of justice.”

The Court cautioned that repeated instances of inordinate delays on the part of the State in filing appeals or revision petitions have become a “matter of serious concern.”

It said that while courts may, in appropriate cases, adopt a liberal approach while condoning such delays, the same cannot become a shield for systemic apathy or bureaucratic inefficiency.

The Court directed Delhi Government's Director of Prosecution to examine the circumstances leading to delays in filing of appeals and take appropriate steps to prevent recurrence of the same in future.

“The State must ensure that institutional mechanisms are strengthened to track, monitor, and file appeals, revisions, etc. within the prescribed limitation period, and every stakeholder – from the Investigating Officer to the Prosecutor to the administrative departments – discharges their role with a sense of responsibility and within a clearly defined time frame. Only then can the larger objective of ensuring timely justice and maintaining public confidence in the criminal justice system be fulfilled,” it said.

Justice Sharma was dealing with a plea filed by the prosecution challenging a trial court order discharging two men under Section 308 of IPC but framed charges under Section 323, 341, 506 and 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC&ST Act. There was a delay of 325 days in filing of the revision petition.

The delay was sought to be justified on the ground of administrative formalities and movement of the file from one table to another. It was submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional, and thus, deserved to be condoned in the interest of justice.

The Court condoned the delay, noting that the accused shall, at the appropriate stage, have ample opportunity to contest the revision petition on merits.

“However, considering the explanation offered for the delay of 325 days, the nature of the offence involved, and the larger interest of justice and society in ensuring that allegations of heinous crimes are subjected to proper adjudication, this Court finds sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the present revision petition,” the Court said.

Title: STATE v. YOGESH @ GOLU & ANR

Click here to read order