Your client is convicted. You file an appeal in the High Court. And then—silence. Not for two years. Not for five. For a decade, or two, or four. By the time the bench hears arguments, your witness may have died, your documents may have degraded, and your client may have already served most of their sentence.
This isn't hypothetical. In 2024, the Supreme Court flagged a murder case in Jharkhand High Court that had been pending for 44 years. The appellant had been waiting since 1980 for judgment. And Jharkhand isn't alone—criminal appeal backlogs across India's 24 high courts run into the hundreds of thousands.
Why Criminal Appeals Move Like Cement
The backlog isn't random. It's structural.
First: sheer volume outpaces benches. Every week, hundreds of criminal appeals land in high courts. But the number of judges hearing criminal appeals—especially senior judges who handle complex murder, sexual assault, and dacoity cases—has barely moved in 20 years. You're asking 15–20 judges to chew through 50,000+ cases. The math breaks.
Second: criminal cases take longer to argue. Unlike civil disputes over property or contracts, criminal appeals involve liberty. The bench wants to hear everything: prosecution evidence, defence cross-examination, medical reports, forensic gaps. A single murder appeal can consume five or six hearing dates, spread over months. A property dispute might settle in two.
Third: pendency itself creates more pendency. When an appeal waits seven years before first hearing, witnesses go missing or die. You file applications to produce new evidence or examine witnesses via video call. The bench grants some, rejects others. You appeal *those* orders. Suddenly, what began as one appeal is now three parallel proceedings.
Fourth: High Courts prioritise fresh criminal cases over old ones. A High Court typically hears a writ petition (urgent habeas corpus case) before a 10-year-old appeal. So the backlog gets pushed further back, quarter after quarter.
What the Backlog Actually Costs Your Client
Delay isn't just inconvenient—it warps justice itself.
- Bail becomes toxic. While a criminal appeal pending for seven years, your client is often out on bail. But seven years of uncertainty—not knowing if conviction will be overturned, if the sentence will increase, if re-arrest awaits—is its own sentence. Jobs are lost. Reputations evaporate. Families fragment.
- Evidence rots. A CCTV recording from 2015 may no longer exist by 2022. A witness's memory of the crime scene fades. A medical report goes missing from the court file. By the time your appeal comes up, you're arguing around ghosts.
- The original trial becomes a fossil. The trial court judge may have retired. The investigating officer may be dead or transferred three times over. Cross-examining them years later—if they're found—is nearly impossible. The bench hears *about* their evidence from transcripts, not from them.
- Your appellate strategy calcifies. New case law emerges. A Supreme Court judgment in 2020 may overturn a principle your appeal relied on in 2016. But your appeal is stuck in queue, waiting to be heard under outdated law.
The Supreme Court's Emerging Interventions
The Jharkhand judgment—and similar orders in recent years—shows the Supreme Court is finally intervening.
In 2024, the Court flagged that pendency of this scale violated the right to speedy trial (Article 21, Constitution of India). It directed Jharkhand High Court to:
- Set timelines for hearing criminal appeals (typically 12–18 months from first hearing to judgment).
- Deploy more judges to dedicated criminal benches.
- Fast-track cases where the appellant has already served most of the sentence or is elderly.
- Use technology: video conferencing for witness examination, digital case files to reduce time lost to missing documents.
The Court has also signalled that High Courts must publish pendency data publicly and explain delays in writing. Shame, it appears, is a tool.
Some High Courts—notably Delhi and Karnataka—have begun experimenting with dedicated criminal benches and fixed hearing schedules. The model is early, but it's working: criminal appeals that would have waited eight years are now being heard in 24–36 months.
What You Should Do Right Now
If your appeal is pending, don't just wait for the system to fix itself. Here's how to force movement.
- File a writ petition (habeas corpus or mandamus) in the Supreme Court. If the appeal has been pending beyond 5 years with no first hearing date, and your client has suffered (lost job, health decline, bail conditions are crushing), the Supreme Court will intervene. Cite the Jharkhand judgment. The Court has begun admitting these on the grounds that delay itself is a violation of the Constitution.
- Request expedited hearing on account of age or sentence served. File an application in the High Court asking for priority. If your client is over 60, or has already served 80% of the sentence, the bench will often agree. This doesn't replace the appeal—it just moves it up the queue.
- Preserve your evidence proactively. Don't assume the trial file is safe. Order certified copies of all medical reports, CCTV stills, forensic opinions now. If a trial witness is elderly, consider recording their statement via video affidavit with the opposing counsel present. These become admissible if the witness dies before your appeal is heard.
- Watch for legislative changes. Parliament is considering amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to impose statutory timelines on High Courts. If enacted, they will reshape appeal hearing schedules. Monitor these—they may help your case retrospectively.
- Consider intermediate remedies. While the appeal waits, file applications for suspension of sentence (bail), or for pardon under the Governor's clemency powers (Article 161). These don't replace the appeal but give your client breathing room.
The Bigger Picture: Why This Matters Beyond One Case
A 44-year-old case isn't just a judicial inefficiency—it's a scar on the system's credibility. Every year an appeal sits unheard, someone loses faith in courts. And the ripple spreads: clients refuse to appeal because "it takes forever anyway"; advocates become cynical; judges work under demoralising conditions.
The Supreme Court's recent interventions suggest the institution is finally taking urgency seriously. But institutions move slowly. In the interim, your job is to use the existing tools—Supreme Court writs, statutory applications, media attention where appropriate—to prevent *your* client from becoming a 30-year-old case.
If you've filed a criminal appeal that's been pending beyond three years with no hearing scheduled, it's time to escalate. File a status report with the High Court registrar. Write to the Chief Justice's office. Consult on a writ petition. Your client's freedom shouldn't wait for systemic reform.
Found this useful? Share it.