Supreme Court Proposes Uniform Timelines to Reduce Pending Judgments in High Courts The Supreme Court has reserved its judgment on a draft set of guidelines aimed at curbing the chronic delay in pronouncing judgments by the High Courts . The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi , examined the suggestions of Amicus Curiae Fauzia Shakil . Key Developments Draft guidelines recommend a maximum three‑month period for delivering a reasoned judgment after it is reserved. High Courts must display the reservation date and status of pending judgments on their official websites. Special emphasis on speedy disposal of cases involving personal liberty , such as bail, anticipatory bail, and death‑reference appeals. Automated monthly emails to Chief Justices about pending judgments; if a judgment exceeds two months, the bench is flagged for intervention. Provision for parties to seek early pronouncement after three months and for reassignment of cases if delay exceeds six months. Important Facts The matter originated from a writ petition (W.P.(Crl.) No. 169/2025) filed by four convicts from Scheduled Tribes and OBCs, who alleged that their criminal appeals, reserved in 2022 by the Jharkhand High Court , remained undecided for over two to three years, violating Article 21 . The Supreme Court earlier directed all Registrar Generals to submit data on judgments reserved on or before 31 January 2025 that were still pending. The current draft builds on earlier pronouncements, such as the 2001 Anil Rai v. State of Bihar guidelines. UPSC Relevance Understanding judicial efficiency is crucial for GS 2 (Polity) and GS 3 (Governance) topics. Delays in judgment affect the right to speedy trial, a component of the rule of law and access to justice—key themes in the Constitution and the Indian judicial system. The proposed guidelines illustrate how the judiciary can self‑regulate, a concept relevant to questions on institutional reforms and accountability. Way Forward Once the Supreme Court pronounces its order, High Courts will be expected to adopt the three‑month timeline, update their websites, and establish monitoring mechanisms through the Chief Justice of India and the respective Chief Justices of High Courts. Civil society and legal‑aid bodies may use the publicly available data to demand compliance, thereby strengthening transparency and public trust in the judicial process.