The Allahabad High Court has observed that judicial officers in Uttar Pradesh were facing increasing institutional pressure due to the shortage of staff, lack of police cooperation, defective investigation practices and delays in forensic science reporting, all of which significantly affected the disposal of criminal cases.
In an order dated May 7, the single-judge Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal referred to the popular dialogue from the film Damini, often used to describe delays in the justice delivery system, but clarified that pendency in criminal trials cannot be attributed solely to judicial officers. It observed that judges cannot independently adjudicate criminal matters without adequate ministerial staff, effective execution of summons and warrants by the police, production of accused and witnesses, and timely forensic reports from FSL authorities. It held that systemic deficiencies in investigation and administrative support play a major role in delays.
The Bench also expressed concern over security risks faced by judicial officers in the State. It noted that judges are at times subjected to direct threats during court proceedings and also face indirect intimidation outside court premises, particularly after passing adverse orders or convictions. Such conditions affect the institutional functioning of district judiciary and impact the confidence with which judicial officers are able to adjudicate criminal matters, including sentencing of habitual offenders, it noted.
Referring to comparative arrangements in other States, the Court noted that judicial officers in Punjab and Haryana were provided personal security officers, whereas in Uttar Pradesh such protection was largely limited to senior judicial posts such as District Judges, Chief Judicial Magistrates and certain Additional District Judges. It suggested that the State government consider extending similar security arrangements to all judicial officers at the district level.
The Court further observed that an independent and effective judiciary requires adequate infrastructure, staffing and cooperation from investigative agencies. It noted that dependency on executive authorities for basic operational requirements affects the efficiency of the criminal justice system.
The Bench also remarked that many young judicial officers enter service with the objective of delivering timely justice but face operational constraints such as inadequate staffing, delays in service of process, poor quality investigations and incomplete forensic reports, which lead to institutional frustration. On systemic impact, the Court observed that delays in criminal trials may contribute to a situation where repeat offenders continue to operate with reduced deterrence, and in some cases, enter public life.
Referring to data placed before it, including a report of the Association for Democratic Reforms, the Court noted that a significant percentage of elected representatives in Uttar Pradesh face criminal cases, including serious offences, and stressed the need for strengthening trial efficiency. It observed that improved staffing, better coordination between police and judiciary, and timely forensic support would ensure faster disposal of criminal cases, leading to more effective criminal justice outcomes for both victims and accused persons.
The observations were made while hearing a bail application in a murder case, where the Court also examined deficiencies in forensic investigation and police handling of evidence.
Earlier, on April 29, the High Court had summoned senior State officials, including the Director General of Police, the Home Secretary and the Director of the Forensic Science Laboratory, in connection with systemic issues affecting criminal trials.
Following interaction with the officials, it noted multiple structural deficiencies in the functioning of district courts and investigating agencies. It observed that district police officers were not consistently attending monthly monitoring meetings chaired by District Judges and directed that such attendance be made mandatory to ensure coordination in criminal justice administration.
The Bench also directed consideration of upgrading the status of the Uttar Pradesh Forensic Science Laboratory as an autonomous body under the Home Department, filling vacancies in forensic units within a fixed timeframe, and improving training of police personnel in forensic evidence collection. It further directed that investigating officers ensure proper DNA matching requests are made to forensic laboratories and that verified digital contact details of accused persons and witnesses be recorded in charge sheets.
It further called for the adoption of technology-driven measures, including the use of speech-to-text tools for recording witness statements under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita framework, and stressed strict compliance with electronic criminal procedure systems, including e-summons, e-warrants, e-FIRs and e-charge sheets. Judicial officers were also encouraged to fully adopt digital processes introduced under the BNSS and related e-process rules to improve efficiency in court administration.
The post Allahabad High Court cites administrative lapses for criminal case pendency in Uttar Pradesh appeared first on India Legal.