ON
← Back to feed
Supreme Court delivers reserved verdict in 2 years, breaks its 3-month limit
India🏛️ PoliticsCenter7 hr. ago

Supreme Court delivers reserved verdict in 2 years, breaks its 3-month limit

The Supreme Court of India delivered a verdict in a long-pending case against Sanofi India Limited over alleged corruption and cheating, taking over two years to pronounce the judgment after it was reserved on May 15, 2024. This delay contrasts with the court's own directive issued three months earlier, which set a three-month deadline for delivering reserved judgments. The judgment outlines criteria for holding corporations criminally liable, emphasizing the need for evidence linking natural persons to alleged offenses. The case had been pending for over seven years, with proceedings stalled since 2019. The delayed verdict highlights concerns about judicial efficiency, especially against the backdrop of new guidelines aimed at reducing case backlogs.

Advertisement

1 reports

Hindustan Times logoHindustan TimesIndependentCenter7 hr. ago
Supreme Court delivers reserved verdict in 2 years, breaks its 3-month limit

The Supreme Court of India delivered a verdict in a long-pending case against Sanofi India Limited over alleged corruption and cheating, taking over two years to pronounce the judgment after it was reserved on May 15, 2024. This delay contrasts with the court's own directive issued three months earlier, which set a three-month deadline for delivering reserved judgments. The judgment outlines criteria for holding corporations criminally liable, emphasizing the need for evidence linking natural persons to alleged offenses. The case had been pending for over seven years, with proceedings stalled since 2019. The delayed verdict highlights concerns about judicial efficiency, especially against the backdrop of new guidelines aimed at reducing case backlogs.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the judicial delay issue as a systemic concern without overtly criticizing or praising any political faction. While it notes the contradiction between the court's self-imposed deadlines and its own prolonged decision-making, it does not frame the issue through a partisan lens. S

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €4/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories