In a significant move aimed at improving access to justice, the Supreme Court has stepped in to address persistent delays in filing appeals through legal aid. The Court, while hearing a long-pending matter, emphasized that delays in legal aid cases-especially those involving prisoners-undermine fairness in the justice system.
The bench led by Justice Sanjay Karol noted that despite technological tools being available, systemic inefficiencies were slowing down the process.
Background of the Case
The matter originated from an appeal filed by Shankar Mahto challenging his conviction and death sentence, which had earlier been confirmed by the Patna High Court. Over time, the case expanded into a broader examination of delays in legal aid matters handled by the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee (SCLSC).
The Court had earlier appointed senior advocate Vibha Datta Makhija as amicus curiae to study the issue and suggest reforms. Multiple reports, consultations with legal services authorities, and responses from High Courts followed.
What Caused the Delay?
During the hearing, the Court examined detailed data and affidavits submitted by the SCLSC. The reasons for delay were found to be multi-layered:
- Late or incomplete applications from prisoners
- Delays in document collection and translation
- Lack of timely communication from panel lawyers
- Difficulty in retrieving records and obtaining certificates from prisons
The bench acknowledged these operational gaps but pointed out that they cannot justify prolonged delays in filing appeals.
“The situation brings about a lack of even-handedness in dealing with condonation of delay,” the Court had earlier observed.
Read also:- Supreme Court Rejects Plea for FIR Against Wife in Dowry Case, Upholds Legal Protection Under Law
The judgment goes beyond procedure and reaffirms the constitutional importance of legal aid. The Court explained that access to free legal services is not just policy it is tied to the right to life and liberty under Article 21.
It recalled earlier rulings to stress that prisoners do not lose their fundamental rights and must be given fair opportunities to challenge convictions.
The bench remarked, in essence, that justice must be accessible regardless of a person’s financial condition.
After extensive consultations, the Court considered a detailed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) prepared with inputs from legal authorities.
The SOP introduces:
- Strict timelines for translation and filing of appeals
- Digital platforms for faster communication
- Categorisation of cases based on urgency
- Monitoring committees to track delays
- Regular coordination between courts, legal aid bodies, and prisons
For instance, priority criminal cases involving serious sentences must be processed within tighter timelines, with continuous monitoring.
In its final directions, the Supreme Court made it clear that timelines under the SOP will be binding.
“The timelines… shall be treated as binding,” the bench stated, indicating a shift from advisory to enforceable standards.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Refuses to Quash Cheque Bounce Case, Says Withdrawal Slip Can Qualify as Cheque
The Court also directed:
- High Courts to examine and adopt the SOP
- Immediate steps to improve coordination with jail authorities
- Creation of monitoring mechanisms for accountability
- Inclusion of delay-explanation formats in all legal aid appeals
Additionally, authorities including the National Informatics Centre were asked to develop a unified digital system for seamless case handling.
The Supreme Court disposed of the matter with directions to implement the SOP framework and ensure compliance across all legal services institutions.
It ordered that compliance reports be submitted by April 30, 2026, with further review scheduled thereafter.
Case Details
Case Title: Shankar Mahto vs State of Bihar
Case Number: Criminal Appeal (arising out of SLP (Crl.) & Crl.MP No. 7862/2017)
Judge: Justice Sanjay Karol & Justice N. Kotiswar Singh
Decision Date: 16th April, 2026
