Blaming court vacations for judicial pendency overlooks deeper issues in India's judiciary. Recent comments from a member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, suggesting that judges work only a few hours a day and take long vacations, fail to address critical challenges such as unfilled judicial vacancies and inadequate infrastructure, which are key factors in court delays.
STATISTICS:
As of March 2024, the Supreme Court of India reported having 82,406 pending cases. Of these, 79% are civil matters and 21% are criminal cases. Throughout 2023, the court managed to dispose of 36,164 of the 37,777 cases that were filed. Additionally, over 4,000 of the pending cases have been on-going for more than a decade?. (Source: National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG))
As of September 15, 2021, over 4.5 crore cases were pending across all courts in India. Of these, 87.6% cases were pending in subordinate courts and 12.3% in High Courts. (Source: PRS Legislative Research).
Between 2010 and 2020, pendency across all courts grew by 2.8% annually. (Source: PRS Legislative Research).
WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR PENDENCY?
Vacancies in the judiciary:
As of May 2024, the Indian judiciary has notable vacancies: the Supreme Court has two vacancies out of 34 sanctioned positions, and High Courts have 345 vacancies out of 1,114 sanctioned posts, representing 31% of the total(Source: Ministry of Law and Justice). These vacancies contribute to case backlogs and delays in the judicial system.
Low judge to population ratio:
The judge-population ratio in the country which stands at only 21.03 judges per million people in 2020(Source: Ministry of Law and Justice), which is not very appreciable.
While for the other countries, the ratio is about 50-70 judges per million people.
Process of law:
The proceedings of cases are so lengthy that people wait years for justice, resulting in numerous hearings and frequent adjournments that frustrate victims. Accused individuals often exploit the legal system to their benefit, prolonging proceedings intentionally.
Luxurious Litigation Phenomenon: As described by CJI NV Ramana, 'luxurious litigation' refers to parties with resources frustrating and delaying the judicial process by filing numerous proceedings.
Culture of Adjournments: According to former President Ram Nath Kovind in 2018, there is a prevailing culture of seeking adjournments as the norm, which hampers swift justice.
Appeals and Case Backlog: The system allows multiple appeals, where parties can challenge lower court decisions in higher courts, often leading to increased backlogs in state High Courts due to frequent, financially motivated appeals.
Lack of infrastructure:
Former Chief Justice of India, Dipak Mishra, highlighted that inadequate court infrastructure for judges, litigants, and staff is a primary cause of case pendency.
Poor funding on lower courts: There is a disparity in funding; higher courts receive more infrastructure investment while subordinate courts operate in inadequate conditions, lacking basic facilities.
Insufficient courts: The judiciary's budgetary allocation is only 0.1% to 0.4% of the total budget, insufficient to expand the number of courts or modernize existing ones.
Lags in adoption of technology:
The Indian judiciary's digitalization was accelerated by COVID-19's physical distancing measures. However, the integration of technologies like machine translation, speech recognition, big data, machine learning, AI, and blockchain into the judicial process is still in its early stages.
Pendency and vacancies in tribunals and special courts:
Tribunals and special courts (such as Fast Track Courts and Family Courts) which were set up to ensure speedy disposal of cases also witness high pendency and vacancies.
For instance, at the end of 2020, 21,259 cases were pending before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). As of April 2021, the NCLT had 39 members out of a sanctioned strength of 63.
As on May 31, 2021, over 9.2 lakh cases were pending in 956 Fast Track Courts across 24 states/UTs (the remaining do not have functional Fast Track Courts).
High rate of filing of cases and low rate of disposal of cases:
The backlog in subordinate courts is driven by rising case loads and low disposal rates, influenced by factors such as limited judges, judge absenteeism, extended trials, lawyer strikes, and frequent judge transfers. Additionally, socio-economic advancements and increased legal awareness have led more people to file cases, using tools like Public Interest Litigations (PIL) and the Right to Information (RTI).
Litigations from the government side:
Reports indicate that the government is a party to 46 per cent of the cases that are pending in courts across India.
As per Legal Information Management and Briefing System (LIMBS), as of 21 June 2021 there are 514,915 cases involving various government departments.
The archaic laws:
The archaic laws that fill up the statute books, faulty or vague drafting of laws and their multiple interpretations by various courts are also reasons for prolonged litigation. Some of these laws date back to the 1880s.
Lack of awareness about the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms:
Less use and awareness of Alternative Dispute resolution, Lok Adalat’s, The Gram Nyayalayas act 2008,plea bargaining etc. is one of the reasons for high pendency rate due to over burden on courts.
CONSEQUENCES OF PENDING CASES
Violation of fundamental rights:
Speedy trial is a fundamental right:
In Kartar Singh vs State of Punjab case 1994, it was declared that the right to speedy trial is an essential part of fundamental right to life and liberty (Article 21).
In criminal cases, the impact of pendency of case is directly related to the violation of the right to equality enshrined under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution.
Under Indian law, an accused is presumed innocent, with bail being the norm and jail the exception.
Despite this, NCRB’s ‘Prison Statistics India-2020’ shows over 75% of 4.83 lakh prisoners are undertrials, meaning 3 out of 4 are in jail awaiting case resolution. This incarceration damages their public reputation and curtails liberty, even if they are eventually found not guilty.
Affects human rights :
Overcrowding of the prisons, already infrastructure deficient, results in violation of human rights. For instance, according to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) 'Prison Statistics India-2020', Indian prisons are operating at an average occupancy rate of 118.5%, indicating that they are overcrowded beyond their capacity.
Impact on the economy:
The Economic Survey 2017 pointed out that the slow resolution of economic and commercial cases was one of the biggest stumbling blocks in reviving the investment cycle in the country.
Impact on ‘ease of doing business’:
India's ranking in the 'Enforcement of Contracts' indicator of the Ease of Doing Business Index has remained relatively low. As of the last available report in 2020, India was ranked 164th out of 190 countries.
The problems that plague contract enforcement can be correlated with the current state of the judiciary system with inordinate delays.
Foreign investors are increasingly doubtful about the timely delivery of justice, which affects the success of programs like ‘Make in India’.
Impact on Public Confidence in Justice:
The common man’s faith in the justice system may get affected due to delay in delivering the justice as a result of pendency in cases.
Corruptions increases
Due to the increase in pendency of cases, people many times don't fight for their rights or the wrongs caused to them.Some instead of fighting the wrong, try to resolve the matter outside the court in an illegal way (e.g by bribing the police officer not to file an FIR against them.)
WAY FORWARD:
Increase the strength of the judicial services:
Substantially increase the strength of the judicial services by appointing more judges at the subordinate level.
Institutionalising All-India Judicial Service.
All-India Judicial Service aims at creating a centralized cadre of District Judges who will be recruited centrally through an all-India examination.
Need to establish a National Judicial Infrastructure Corporation
To improve judicial infrastructure across the country.
Corporation could bring the much-needed “uniformity and standardisation” which could “revolutionise” judicial infrastructure.
Filling vacancy:
Reduce the pendency of cases by filling sanctioned judicial positions
Improve legal framework:
Government must remove archaic and dysfunctional laws and reduce vagueness.
As the Malimath Committee noted, amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Indian Penal Code, or the Indian Evidence Act are necessary to bring them in tune with the demands of time and the aspirations of the people.
Use of technology:
Adopting digital solutions to aid in the disposal of cases. For instance, Centre government has been implementing the e-Courts Mission Mode Project across the country and the number of computerised district and subordinate courts had increased from 13,672 to 18,735 between 2014 and 2023.
Removing geographical barriers:
Set up circuit benches of the Supreme Court:
Multiple Law Commission and Parliamentary Committee have recommended Circuit Benches of the Supreme Court to be set up around the country.
Supreme Court bench in south India
The bar councils of the five southern states recommended a Supreme Court bench in south India.
Promote Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) to reduce the burden of the courts:
Mechanisms like ADR (Alternate Dispute Resolution), Lok Adalats, Gram Nyayalayas etc should be promoted by creating awareness about these mechanisms among the people.
PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q. Analyse the multifaceted causes of high case pendency in the Indian judiciary and discuss the potential reforms that could effectively reduce this burden. (15 marks, 250 words)
