An Eye-Opener For All High Courts Across Country: Supreme Court Asks Rajasthan HC Why Dowry Death Case With Stay On Trial Remained Pending For 26 Years

​The Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan observed, “This litigation is an eye-opener for all the High Courts across the country. If criminal trials in such serious offences remain pending for years together on the strength of interim orders passed by the High Courts, it would lead to nothing but a mockery of justice. Justice has to be done with all the parties. Justice cannot be done only with the accused persons. Justice has to be done even with the victim and the family members of the victim. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

AOR Abhishek Gupta appeared for the Petitioners, while Senior Advocate Shiv Mangal Sharma appeared for the Respondents.

The Court observed, "We would like to know first and the foremost why it took 23 years for the High Court to take up the Criminal Revision Petition filed by the petitioners for hearing, more particularly when the subject matter of challenge in the Criminal Revision Petition was an order framing charge in a very sensitive and serious trial like one of dowry death…We would like to examine the entire record of the proceedings. We are saying so because we are perturbed by the fact that despite an interim relief operating, why the matter was not taken up for hearing at the earliest. Why during this interregnum period of 23 years, the State of Rajasthan kept quiet and did not take any steps to get the Criminal Revision Petition heard and decided on merits."

Factual Background

The deceased got married to the Petitioner No.1. The Petitioners No. 2 to 6 were the in-laws of the deceased. The deceased died at her matrimonial home in mysterious circumstances. An FIR was registered by the brother of the deceased at Nazirabad City Police Station, District Ajmer, for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”).

In the FIR, the brother alleged that her sister was being harassed by the petitioners for the demand of dowry. He further alleged that her sister was killed by the petitioners, herein by administering poison. Upon registration of the FIR, an investigation was undertaken. In the post-mortem report, the Doctors opined that the exact cause of death could be assigned only after the histopathological report is received.

In January 2003, the petitioners preferred a Criminal Revision Petition under Section 401 read with Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to challenge the order passed by the Trial Court dated in November 2002 framing a charge.

The High Court, by Order dated February, 2003, had stayed the further proceedings of the trial. The Criminal Revision Petition filed by the petitioners in the year 2003 came to be taken up for hearing by the Single Judge of the High Court on August 24, 2023, i.e., after about 20 years.

In March 2024, the matter was released for re-hearing and was ordered to be listed before the regular bench. In September 2024, the matter was once again heard and ultimately, by impugned order, the High Court rejected the Criminal Revision Petition.

Observations of the Court

The Court said, “This litigation is very disturbing. What we are about to record is something very painful. Who is responsible only a detailed inquiry at our end will decide.”

The Court directed the Registrar General of the High Court of Rajasthan to forward the entire record with all the order sheets by a Special Messenger to this Court at the earliest.

The Bench said, "We would also like to know from the State as to what steps it took as the prosecuting agency to get the Criminal Revision Petition filed by the petitioners heard at the earliest."

“We direct the Registrar General of the High Court of Rajasthan to forward the entire record with all the order sheets by a Special Messenger to this Court at the earliest…We would also like to know from the Registrar General of the High Court as to how many Criminal Revision Petitions came to be heard and disposed of between 2001 and 2026. We want the High Court to provide us with a break up of how many criminal revision petitions were filed in the year 2001 and how many came to be disposed of. We want this break up right up to the year 2026…We would also like to know how many times the Criminal Revision Petition filed by the petitioners – herein in the High Court was notified for hearing from the date of its filing till the date it came to be dismissed.”, the Court observed.

Conclusion

It was directed, “In this regard, we request the Chief Justices of all the High Courts to ensure that the petitions wherein interim orders are passed holding up the trials should be immediately taken up for hearing, more particularly in sensitive and serious matters like murder, dowry death, rape etc…Once the file is received from the High Court, we shall proceed to pass further orders.”

Accordingly, the Court listed the matter for further hearing on January 15, 2026.

Cause Title: Vijay Kumar and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan [SLP (Crl.) No. 71965 of 2025]

Appearances:

Petitioner: AOR Abhishek Gupta and Advocate Sheena Taqui

Respondents: Senior Advocate Shiv Mangal Sharma

Click here to read/download the Order