SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(SC) 1223

J.JAGANNADHA RAO, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
R. D. Upadhyay – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


ORDER

1. Notices on this petition shall be issued to all the High Courts returnable by 26.2.1999. The High Courts shall be required to furnish a list of all pending Criminal/district wise in different courts specifying the offences to which they relate and if they are pending for more than five years as on 3I.12.98, the reason for not being disposed of speedily. The High Courts will also indicate whether the existing courts are sufficient for speedy disposal of the pending cases including trials and, if not, what are the requirements for the additional courts.

2. The affidavit filed by State of U.P. is highly unsatisfactory and does not give details as were required by this Court. Apart from the fact that the details of pending cases beyond five years have not been given, they have also not specified the offences for which the cases mentioned in the schedule appended to the affidavit are pending. We, therefore, direct the State of U.P. to file a better affidavit by 26.2.1999.

3. On a perusal of the various charts filed by the State of Punjab in response to the orders passed by this Court from time to time, it has come to our notice that in the State of Punjab, there are 140 under t



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top