Allahabad High Court Judge Declares Inability to Deliver Verdict After Grueling Day
In a striking incident highlighting the immense pressures faced by the judiciary, a judge at the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Tuesday openly recorded his inability to dictate a verdict in court after presiding over hearings in 30 cases until 7 PM. Justice Subhash Vidyarthi concluded the long day by stating, "Since I am feeling hungry, tired, and physically incapacitated to dictate the judgment, the verdict is reserved." This candid admission underscores the severe workload and physical demands placed on judicial officers.
Overwhelming Caseload and Extended Hearings
The judge's exhaustion came at the end of a day where a staggering 235 cases were listed for hearing before him. This docket included 92 fresh cases, 101 regular matters, 39 fresh miscellaneous applications, and three additional matters. Despite this heavy schedule, Justice Vidyarthi managed to hear only 29 fresh cases by 4:15 PM. However, the proceedings took a significant turn when he was informed that the next case had been remanded by the Supreme Court, prompting an extended hearing that continued until 7 PM.
Complex Case Involving Debt Recovery Tribunal
The case that led to the marathon hearing relates to a petition filed in 2025 challenging an order from a Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). In May 2025, the Allahabad High Court had set aside the DRT's order and directed it to reconsider the matter afresh. This decision was subsequently appealed in the Supreme Court, which on August 25 last year, set aside the High Court's order on the grounds that the respondent had not been properly heard. The Supreme Court also instructed the High Court to expedite a fresh decision on the petition, preferably within six months—a deadline that expired on Tuesday.
Exhaustion After Lengthy Legal Arguments
During the intensive hearing, senior advocates presented detailed arguments: Anuj Kudesia represented the petitioner, Sudeep Kumar appeared for the respondents, and PK Srivastava advocated for Canara Bank. After these extensive submissions, Justice Vidyarthi expressed that he was completely exhausted and physically unable to dictate the judgment at that moment. This incident brings to light the critical issue of judicial burnout and the overwhelming caseloads that can impede the timely delivery of justice.
The reservation of the verdict means that the judgment will be delivered at a later date, once the judge has recovered from the day's exertions. This event serves as a poignant reminder of the human limitations within the judicial system and the need for sustainable workloads to ensure effective and fair legal proceedings.
