Supreme Court Slams Jharkhand High Court for Two-Year Delay in Delivering Reserved Judgment
Judgment reserved in July 2023 still pending; Supreme Court says delay undermines justice.
Case highlights need for judicial accountability and timely pronouncements in Indian courts.
By Our Legal Reporter
New Delhi: November 12, 2025:
In a rare and strongly worded observation, the Supreme Court of India has criticized the Jharkhand High Court for failing to deliver a judgment more than two years after reserving it. The case, M/s Mivaan Steels Limited v. M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited, was heard on July 18, 2023, but no decision has been pronounced till date.
A bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said the delay “shocks the judicial conscience” and undermines the credibility of the justice delivery system. The apex court’s intervention has reignited debate on judicial delays and accountability in India.
Background of the Case
The dispute involved Mivaan Steels Limited and Bharat Coking Coal Limited and was heard by the Jharkhand High Court in 2023. After extensive arguments, the High Court reserved its judgment on July 18, 2023. However, despite the passage of more than two years, the judgment has not been delivered.
The matter was brought before the Supreme Court, which expressed serious concern over the delay. The apex court noted that litigants are left in uncertainty when judgments are reserved but not pronounced within a reasonable time.
Supreme Court’s Observations
- Delay shocks judicial conscience – The court said that failing to deliver a judgment for over two years after reserving it is unacceptable.
- Justice delayed is justice denied – The bench emphasized that timely pronouncements are essential to uphold the rule of law.
- Accountability of judges – The court hinted at the need for mechanisms to ensure that reserved judgments are delivered within a fixed time frame.
The judges stressed that litigants cannot be left in limbo indefinitely, as such delays erode public trust in the judiciary.
The Larger Issue of Judicial Delays
India’s judiciary has long struggled with delays and pendency of cases. According to official data, millions of cases remain pending across courts, and delayed judgments add to the burden.
Also Read: Allahabad High Court Orders Police Verification for Passports Must Be Completed Within Four Weeks
Legal experts point out that while courts often reserve judgments after hearing arguments, there is no strict timeline for pronouncement. This leads to situations where litigants wait months or even years for decisions, causing hardship and uncertainty.
The Supreme Court’s strong remarks in this case highlight the urgent need for judicial reforms to ensure timely delivery of justice.
Impact on Litigants
- Financial uncertainty – Businesses and individuals cannot plan their affairs without clarity on legal disputes.
- Loss of confidence – Prolonged delays erode trust in the judiciary.
- Denial of justice – As the saying goes, “justice delayed is justice denied.”
For Mivaan Steels Limited and Bharat Coking Coal Limited, the delay has meant prolonged uncertainty and potential financial losses.
Expert Opinions
- Senior advocates argue that reserved judgments should ideally be delivered within three months, as per judicial best practices.
- Judicial reform activists say the case highlights the need for stricter monitoring of reserved judgments.
- Academics note that delays in pronouncing judgments undermine the constitutional promise of speedy justice.
Also Read: Paying Tax on Income Does Not Protect Benami Property Deals from Legal Action
Possible Reforms
- Fixed timelines – Courts could adopt rules requiring judgments to be delivered within 90 days of being reserved.
- Transparency – Publishing lists of reserved judgments could help track delays.
- Accountability mechanisms – Judicial councils or monitoring bodies could ensure compliance with timelines.
- Technology solutions – Digital case management systems could remind judges of pending reserved judgments.
Such reforms could help reduce delays and restore public confidence in the judiciary.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s sharp criticism of the Jharkhand High Court’s two-year delay in pronouncing a reserved judgment is a wake-up call for the Indian judiciary. By declaring that such delays “shock the judicial conscience,” the apex court has highlighted the urgent need for judicial accountability and timely pronouncements.
This case is not just about one dispute—it reflects a larger systemic issue that affects millions of litigants across India. Unless reforms are implemented, the promise of speedy justice will remain unfulfilled.