bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi was hearing the plea filed by the victim of the sexual offence against the Madras High Court’s order granting bail to the accused.

The Supreme Court strongly criticized its Registry for delaying the listing of a case by over three years despite a clear judicial order to list it ‘immediately after service.’ The Court directed the Registrar (Judicial) to conduct an inquiry into the lapse and submit a report within two weeks identifying the officer responsible.” A bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi was hearing the plea filed by the victim of the sexual offence against the Madras High Court’s order granting bail to the accused. The petition filed in 2022, was pending when the accused secured a settlement and filed a quashing petition before the High Court under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings. Also Read – “Existential Crisis In Himalayas”: Supreme Court Poses Queries To Himachal Govt On Zoning, Deforestation, Mining, Constructions, Etc In the meantime, when the petition was pending for listing before the Supreme Court, the High Court based on the settlement between the parties had quashed the criminal case against the accused. The petition came to be listed only on Sep. 23, 2025, which was supposed to be listed soon after the completion of service which was completed on May 30, 2022, i.e., a delay of over three years. Looking towards the development taken at the High Court level quashing the criminal case, the Court termed the petition to be ‘infructuous’ but called this a “disturbing factor,” making clear that even administrative lapses within the Court’s Registry will not be ignored. Also Read – MP High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Own Judge’s “Damning & Disparaging” Remarks Against Sessions Judge “One disturbing factor is still there that while issuing notice by this Court on 13.05.2022, the Registry was directed to list this matter immediately after service is complete to the respondents. As per the office report, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were served on 30.05.2022. Even thereafter, the case is not listed by the Registry.”, the court said. “The Registrar (Judicial) to hold an enquiry and submit a report in Chambers why the case was not listed for more than three years and three months despite the specific order of this Court and who is responsible for the same. The report be made available in chambers within two weeks.”, the court directed. Related – SC Asks Explanation From Registry For 3 Years Delay In Listing Vijay Mallya’s Review Tags Supreme CourtJustice JK MaheshwariJustice Vijay BishnoiSC RegistryDelay in Listing Similar Posts “Existential Crisis In Himalayas”: Supreme Court Poses Queries To Himachal Govt On Zoning, Deforestation, Mining, Constructions, Etc The Supreme Court directed the State of Himachal Pradesh to file comprehensive and verified responses on a wide range of issues concerning its fragile ecology and environmental conditions, in the wake of unprecedented monsoon rains that wreaked havoc across the State earlier this year.The order was passed on September 23, in Suo Motu… MP High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Own Judge’s “Damning & Disparaging” Remarks Against Sessions Judge In a rare move, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has initiated suo motu proceedings over a it’s own judge’s “damning” order making “disparaging” remarks against a Trial Court judge, while hearing a corruption-related bail matter. The Single Bench, in its order of September 12, had called for an inquiry and disciplinary action against a Sessions Judge… Supreme Court Raises Concerns Over Judicial Officers’ Career Stagnation Due To Delay In Promotions The Supreme Court expressed concerns over how young judicial officers are facing career stagnation due to systemic delays in promotions as a District Judge. The 5-judge constitution bench was considering the issue of whether a judicial officer, who has already completed 7 years in the Bar, is entitled to be appointed as a District Judge… Supreme Court Daily Round-Up : September 23, 2025 Links of today’s reports. Builder-Bank Nexus: After Preliminary Enquiry Finds Cognizable Offence Over Outside NCR Projects, Supreme Court Asks CBI To Register FIR In the matter where the Supreme Court ordered a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into a builder-banks nexus exploiting homebuyers in the national capital region, the CBI was today allowed to proceed with registration of criminal cases qua projects outside NCR.On a mentioning, a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar…