Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Anoop Singh vs U.T. Of J And K on 10 March, 2026
1
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-C
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.1398/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-06-2025
in BA No. 291/2024 passed by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and
Ladakh at Jammu]
ANOOP SINGH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
U.T. OF J AND K Respondent(s)
Date : 10-03-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Anant Kumar, Adv.
Dr. Pratap Singh Nerwal, AOR
For Respondent(s) :
Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG
Mr. Parth Awasthi, Adv.
Mr. Pashupati Nath Razdan, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Our last Order dated 3-2-2026 reads thus:-
1. The petitioner has been denied regular bail by the High
Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh in connection with the
First Information Report No.0192/2018 dated 18-10-2018 registered
with Bari Brahmana Police Station, District Samba, Union
Territory of Jammu and Kashmir for the offence punishable under
Section 302 of the Ranbir Penal Code (now IPC).
2. The incident in question is dated 4-10-2018. The petitioner
was
Signature Not Verified
arrested in connection with the alleged crime and at the end
Digitally signed by
of the investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed for the
Date: 2026.03.17 offence of murder. The filing of charge-sheet and the order of
VISHAL ANAND
17:05:03 IST
Reason: committal culminated in Sessions Case CNR No.JKSB010005422023
pending as on date in the Court of Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Samba.
2
In the said Charge-Sheet, the Investigating Officer cited two
persons as the eye-witnesses to the incident. The two eye-
witnesses are PW 2 and PW 3 respectively. On 23-2-2019, charge
came to be framed by the Trial Court. Prosecution was directed to
produce witnesses on 7-3-2019. On that particular date, only one
witness came to be examined i.e. PW 13. The Trial Court after
recording the oral evidence of PW 13, directed PW 12 and PW 1
respectively to be summoned for the recording of their evidence.
On 23-3-2019, the oral evidence of the PW 2 came to be recorded.
PW 4 the widow of the deceased also appeared for her oral
examination. However, she filed a petition with the Trial Court
praying for further investigation in the matter. The Trial Court
declined to entertain such application filed by the widow of the
deceased. After a passage of time, the widow of the deceased
moved the High Court. The High Court directed de-novo
investigation. Upon completion of the de-novo investigation, a
supplementary charge-sheet came to be filed.
3. Later, the trial got stalled because of Covid Pandemic.
4. However, unfortunately the fact remains that after 2022,
there has not been any further progress in the trial. The
petitioner before us is in jail as an under-trial prisoner past 7
years.
5. In such circumstances, referred to above, we passed an
Order dated 29-1-2026. The Order reads thus:-
“1. In pursuance of our Order dated 22-1-2026, the Trial
Court has forwarded its Report explaining why the trial is
still pending past 8 years.
2. The Report highlights many grounds due to which trial
has got delayed.
3. We want the learned counsel appearing for the Union
Territory of Jammu and Kashmir to study the report and
respond to the same.
4.Registry shall provide one copy of the Report forwarded by the
Trial Court to the learned counsel appearing for the
respondent as well as to the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner.
5. List on 3-2-2026 on top of the Board.
6. In pursuance of our order, referred to above, the Trial
Court has forwarded its Report explaining the status of the trial
and why the trial has not attained finality till this date.
7. We looked into the Report of the Trial Court threadbare.
8. The Report is extremely disturbing. The Report highlights
the sorry state of affairs at the end of the prosecuting agency.
We are at pains to note that in last 7 years, the prosecution has
been able to examine only 7 witnesses. Prosecution still intends
3
to examine 17 more witnesses. We wonder who are these 17
witnesses who are yet to be examined and if not examined, what
would be the adverse effect on the case of the prosecution.
However, the most unfortunate part of the Report of the Trial
Court is that past 82 hearings, not a single witness has been
examined.
9. We propose to take a very strict view of this matter. The
U.T., as the investigating agency, owes an explanation for this
gross and inordinate delay in conclusion of the trial.
10. In such circumstances, referred to above, we direct the
Home Secretary, Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir to file its
response within a period of four weeks from today.
11. Registry shall provide one copy of the Report forwarded by
the Trial Court to the learned counsel appearing for the Union
Territory of Jammu and Kahmir.
12. The learned counsel appearing for the UT of Jammu and
Kashmir shall, in turn, forward one copy of the Report of the
Trial Court to the Home Secretary at the earliest.
13. In the meantime, we direct that the petitioner be released
on interim bail, subject to terms and conditions that the Trial
Court may deem fit to impose.
14. We request the Home Secretary, UT of Jammu and Kashmir to
appear online on the next date of hearing.
15. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner brought something very shocking to our notice. He
submitted that this is not a solitary case of an under-trial
prisoner who is languishing in jail past 7 years. There are
hundreds of such under-trial prisoners in the UT of Jammu and
Kashmir languishing in jail past more than 10 years and their
trials are pending.
16. If what has been said by the learned counsel, referred to
above, is true then this is something beyond our comprehension.
This is something extraordinary and calls for immediate action.
17. We want the Home Secretary to place on record the details
of all criminal trials pending in the U.T. wherein the accused
persons are in custody past more than 5 years or more as an
under-trial prisoner.
18. Post it on 10-3-2026.”
2. In pursuance of our Order, referred to above, the Principal
Secretary, Home Department, Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir
has joined online.
4
3. We also looked into the affidavit filed by Shri Chandrakar
Bharti, Principal Secretary, Home Department, UT of J&K.
4. It appears from the information furnished in the Affidavit,
more particularly, the status of the under-trial that there are in
all 351 Sessions Trials pending in the UT of Jammu and Kashmir.
There are in all 585 accused persons who have been put to trial.
However, the shocking fact with these trials i.e. 351 in numbers is
that they are pending past more than five years.
5. One another disturbing feature highlighted in the chart is
that out of 351 cases 235 cases are pending at the stage of
recording of the oral evidence of the witnesses.
6. Annexure-R1 to the affidavit filed by the Principal Secretary,
Home Department is a chart.
7. The chart reads thus:-
STATUS OF UNDER TRIAL
Stages of trial Break up of 349 cases
Accused
Total
District in
Case
Custody Prelimanary
Case Case at Case at UAPA NDPS Other
Arguments/ Reserve for Defense
at PW 342 Final
Pre-Charge Judgement Witness
Stage Cr.P.C Arguments
evidence
Case Accused Case AccusedJammu 71 118 – 01 50 02 18 – 07 31 08 11 56
Samba 15 27 – – 10 – 05 – – – – – 15
Kathua 07 08 – – 03 01 03 – – – 01 01 06
Udhampur 28 56 – – 16 04 06 02 – – 06 14 22
Reasi 14 25 – – 10 01 02 01 – – – – 14
Poonch 16 35 – – 11 – 05 – 04 07 01 03 12
Rajouri 15 22 – – 08 – 04 03 – – – – 15
Doda 34 38 01 – 27 – 06 – 08 15 – – 26
Kishtwar 02 02 – – 01 – 01 – – – – – 02
Ramban 05 08 – – 01 – 03 01 – – – – 05
Anantnag 16 22 – – 12 – 04 – 07 12 02 02 07
Kulgam 07 12 – 01 03 01 02 – 02 07 02 02 03
Shopian 03 05 – – 01 – 02 – – – – – 03
Pulwama 13 14 – – 13 – – – 11 12 – – 02
Budgam 04 06 – – 04 – – – 01 01 – – 03
Ganderbal 03 03 – – 01 – 02 – 01 01 – – 02
Bandipora 13 23 – – 08 – 05 – 06 14 – – 07
Baramulla 47 93 – – 31 05 11 – 21 59 02 02 24
Kupwara 15 28 01 02 09 – 03 – 12 25 – – 03
Srinagar 23 40 – 02 16 – 02 01 07 15 01 01 14
241
Total 351 585 02 06 235 14 84 08 87 199 23 36Note:- The trial of 02 cases have been suspended due to
accused found not fit. (In District Srinagar).
8. We heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Ms.
Aishwarya Bhati, the learned Additional Solicitor General assisted
by Mr. Parth Awasthi, the learned counsel appearing for the Union
Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and we also heard Shri Chandrakar
Bharti, the Principal Secretary, Home Department, UT of Jammu and
5
Kashmir online.
9. There could be many reasons for the delay in all these cases.
However, we should not ignore or overlook the fact that the accused
has a right to have speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of
the Constitution. Equally, justice is also to be done to the
victims and their families. Once the charge is framed by the Trial
Court, it is expected of that particular Trial Court to start with
the recording of the oral evidence and conclude the trial in
accordance with law at the earliest.
10. Prima facie, it appears that these cases are delayed as the
prosecuting agency is unable to produce the prosecution witnesses
before the Trial Court for their examination.
11. According to us, the aforesaid could hardly be a ground for
delay in the conclusion of the trial.
12. Since we have a particular figure now before us i.e. 235 cases
pending at the stage of recording of the oral evidence of the
witnesses, we request Ms. Bhati, the learned ASG to furnish the
following information by the next date of hearing. With respect to
each of the Sessions case, we would like to know (i) the date of
framing of the charge by the Trial Court (ii) how many witnesses
have been cited in the charge-sheet, how many are proposed to be
examined and how many have been actually examined by the Trial
Court till this date (iii) the date of the examination of the first
prosecution witness and the date of examination of the last
prosecution witness and the next date fixed by the Trial Court for
the recording of the evidence (iv) summary of reasons/remarks for
the delay in the examination of the witnesses and in the last
proposed/estimated time of disposal/conclusion of the Sessions
case.
13. We also want an affidavit or a chart attached to the affidavit
furnishing the information as regards the actual period of
incarceration of each of the accused persons in those pending 351
cases. We would also like to know the offences with which these
accused persons have been charged with.
6
14. We have taken up this issue very seriously and the whole idea
in initiating this exercise is to ensure that the under-trial
prisoners do not languish in jail for indefinite period of time and
the victims also get speedy justice.
15. Many times, we have observed that justice is not only to be
done with the accused persons, justice is also to be done with the
victims and kith and kin of the victims.
16. We also impressed upon Shri Chandrakar Bharti, the Principal
Secretary, Home Department, UT of Jammu and Kashmir to look into
this matter very seriously.
17. We expect the Union Territory to have some plan, or to put in
other words work out some modalities by which this problem of delay
in the conclusion of trial is being taken care of. Mr. Bharti has
assured us that he will take up this matter, more particularly, the
larger issue involved very seriously and would have meetings at the
earliest with the agencies concerned. We must be shown some plan
duly prepared by the U.T. in this regard.
18. For the present, we are not saying anything further. Once the
information sought for by us is placed before us, we shall proceed
to hear the matter further.
19. Post this matter for further hearing on 21-4-2026 on top of
the Board.
20. Mr. Bharti, Principal Secretary shall join online.
(VISHAL ANAND) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
