Click the Play button to listen to article

The Supreme Court has flagged the “shocking pendency” of criminal appeals before the Jharkhand High Court after a murder case arising from a 1981 incident remained in the judicial system for nearly 44 years.

A Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice K Vinod Chandran, while hearing an appeal filed by on Simon Soren against the Jharkhand High Court's 2024 judgment convicting him in a double-murder case of 1981,  noted that the trial itself took 22 years, while the appeal against the conviction remained pending before the High Court for another 22 years. The bench observed that the case projected "the failure of the judicial system."

The Court had earlier described the delay as “very disturbing.”

The case involved a double murder committed in 1981. Charges were framed in 1991 and the trial court ultimately convicted the accused in 2002. The criminal appeal challenging the conviction was decided by the Jharkhand High Court only in 2024.

The Supreme Court noted that the extraordinary delay had resulted in the criminal proceedings continuing for decades. Of the six accused originally arrayed in the case, two died before charges were framed and three of the four convicted accused died while the appeal was pending. Simon Soren, now around 70 years old, is the sole surviving accused.

Shocking number of pendency in Jharkhand HC

In the earlier hearing, the Court had asked the Jharkhand High Court to file a comprehensive report as to why the Trial and the criminal appeal took nearly 45 years. In response to this, an affidavit has been filed by the Registrar of the Jharkhand High Court.

Perusing the affidavit, the Court has described that it reveals a "shocking pendency of criminal appeals". As per the affidavit, the delay in trial has been explained by stating that the accused were absconding for 6 years. However, the Court questioned why no explanation has been given for the 12 years it took for the trial to be completed when charges were framed in 1991 itself.

It has also been revealed from the report of the District and Sessions Judge that the present case was transferred from one trial Court to another, five times in the 11 years since 1991.

Expressing concern over the pendency of criminal appeals, the Supreme Court allowed the petitioner to implead the Union of India as a party.

"We were concerned with the pendency of the Criminal Appeals as pointed out in the Report of the High Court and we hence thought it fit to permit the petitioner to implead the Union of India in the above matter. The learned Advocate-on-Record appearing for the High Court would serve a copy of the Affidavit of Compliance filed by the Registrar General to the Office of the Attorney General/ Solicitor General."

Supreme Court orders release of aged convict

Despite the gravity of the double murder, the Court said it could not ignore the ordeal suffered by the accused over the preceding 45 years.

Soren had spent two years, four months and 12 days in custody. The Court also took note of his age and multiple ailments, as well as the State's affidavit stating that he was admitted to hospital while in custody.

The Bench therefore suspended his sentence and directed that he be released forthwith, subject to his furnishing personal surety and undertaking not to commit any crime while on bail.

The Supreme Court also directed that the original case records be requisitioned in both physical and digital form. The records are to be sent within four weeks, following which the digital records will be made available to the respective counsel.

In view of the issue of criminal appeal pendency, the Court permitted the petitioner to implead the Union of India in the proceedings and directed that the High Court Registrar General's affidavit be served on the Attorney General/Solicitor General's office.

The matter has been posted for further hearing on September 18, 2026.

The case has placed a sharp judicial spotlight on the consequences of prolonged criminal litigation, where a 1981 double murder case took roughly four decades to pass through the trial and appellate stages.

"Despite the horrendous crime of a double murder, we cannot close our eyes to the ordeal suffered by the accused in the last 45 years. Especially noting his medical condition and the affidavit of the State that the petitioner is admitted in the hospital, though in custody, we suspend the sentence and direct that the petitioner shall be released forthwith on condition of his not committing any crime when on bail and on his personal surety."

The Court asked for the original records, both in physical and digital form, from the High Court and the Trial Court. Upon the receipt of the records, it has directed that the soft copy of them should be made available to the parties.

The matter will now be heard on September 18.

Case Details: SIMON SOREN v THE STATE OF JHARKHAND|SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s).9856/2026

Click Here To Read Order

Appearances: Fauzia Shakil, AOR and Ms. Nazmeen Ahmed, Adv

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Pallavi Langar, AOR Mr. Sujeet Kumar Chaubey, Adv. Ms. Anushka Ragunath, Adv.

Mr. Ninad Laud, Adv. Mr. Zubin Dash, Adv. Mr. Deb Ganapathy, Adv. Ms. Mishi Gupta, Adv. Ms. Narain Rashika Ashok, AOR

Tags: