The Supreme Court on Thursday criticized prolonged delays in cases concerning personal liberty, stating that courts should not schedule such matters after long gaps. This remark came from a bench of Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih after being informed that the Punjab and Haryana High Court had set a hearing for a temporary bail plea on medical grounds two months later. The plea was filed by a petitioner seeking interim bail to facilitate urgent surgery for his two-year-old daughter, but the high court, in its February 21 order, scheduled the hearing for April 22.
Expressing concern over the delay, the Supreme Court allowed the petitioner to approach the high court for an earlier hearing and urged the court to prioritize the matter, particularly regarding the request for temporary bail on medical grounds. The petitioner’s counsel had already applied for an expedited hearing, but the request was dismissed. Justice Gavai, in response, questioned whether the high court would now reject the application given the Supreme Court’s observations, implying that the matter should be reconsidered with urgency.
The Supreme Court noted that issuing a notice on the plea could lead to further delays, as the respondent would require time to respond. Instead, it emphasized that the high court could take up the matter promptly. Justice Gavai also remarked that the Supreme Court expects high courts to give due consideration to its observations. The petitioner’s counsel clarified that the interim bail plea had been clubbed with the main petition, leading to the extended delay, but the apex court underscored the importance of addressing urgent liberty-related matters without unnecessary postponements.