In News:

The Indian judiciary today faces an unprecedented backlog of over 5 crore pending cases across all levels—Supreme Court, High Courts, and District Courts. This crisis not only weakens the justice delivery system but also erodes citizen trust in governance and constitutional values.

Magnitude of Pendency

As of mid-2025:

• District Courts account for nearly 90% of pendency, with 4.6 crore+ cases.
• High Courts face a backlog of 63.3 lakh+ cases.
• The Supreme Court has 86,700+ pending cases.

A notable disparity exists between criminal and civil case disposal. While 85.3% of criminal cases in High Courts are resolved within a year, only 38.7% of civil cases in district courts meet this timeline. Alarmingly, nearly 20% of civil cases remain unresolved for more than five years. The Chief Justice of India has flagged the issue of excessive caution in granting bail as one contributor to this delay.

Causes of Judicial Pendency

• Low Judge-Population Ratio: With only 15 judges per 10 lakh population, India lags behind the Law Commission’s recommendation of 50 judges per million. Though women constitute 38% of lower judiciary, their representation in High Courts remains at just 14%.
• Adjournment Culture: Excessive adjournments worsen pendency. A Delhi High Court study found 70% of delayed cases involved over three adjournments, leading to the infamous “tareek pe tareek” phenomenon.
• Underutilized ADR: Mediation, arbitration, and conciliation are not fully tapped despite their cost-effectiveness. Absence of comprehensive ADR performance data further hampers evaluation.
• Rising Litigation: Greater legal awareness, increasing PILs, and non-meritorious cases fuel the backlog. Notably, nearly half of pending cases involve government departments, where routine appeals prolong litigation.
• Structural Deficits: Shortage of courtrooms, staff, weak ICT systems, delays in evidence and witness availability, and lack of case management frameworks further strain judicial functioning.

Reform Initiatives

• National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms (2011): Enhancing access and efficiency.
• e-Courts Project: Paperless filing, virtual hearings, faster processing.
• Fast Track Special Courts: Speedy trials for specific offences.
• Tele-Law & Nyaya Bandhu: Expanding legal aid through technology and pro bono services.
• Appointments: Between 2014–2024, 62 Supreme Court and 976 High Court judges were appointed; district courts saw strength rise from 19,518 to 25,609.

Lok Adalats remain highly effective, having disposed of 27.5 crore cases between 2021–2025.

Strengthening the Judicial System

• Capacity Expansion: Raise judge strength to 50 per million, expedite appointments, enhance collegium transparency, and establish specialized courts.
• Infrastructure & Technology: Create a National Judicial Infrastructure Authority, expand e-Courts, use AI for case clustering and tracking, and adopt tools like FASTER for electronic transmission of orders.
• Procedural Reforms: Enforce strict limits on adjournments, adopt summary trials, pre-trial conferences, and time-bound hearings.
• Promote ADR: Effective implementation of the Mediation Act, 2023, expansion of arbitration centres, and scaling up of Lok Adalats can significantly reduce court burden.
• Legal Access: Strengthen Tele-Law, legal aid clinics, and NALSA’s outreach for marginalized groups.

Conclusion

India’s judiciary stands at a crossroads. The sheer volume of pending cases undermines the principle that “justice delayed is justice denied.” Addressing judicial vacancies, modernizing infrastructure, embracing technology, and institutionalizing ADR mechanisms are no longer policy options but constitutional imperatives. Strengthening the justice delivery system is vital not only for effective governance but also for sustaining the rule of law and democratic trust.