In News:

The issue of judicial delays and adjournments has become a significant concern in India’s judicial system. President Droupadi Murmu, while addressing the National Conference of District Judiciary in September 2024, emphasized the need to eliminate the culture of adjournments. These delays particularly affect the poor and rural populations, who often suffer in silence, avoiding court due to the fear of protracted justice.

Background of the Indian Judicial System

India’s judicial system has evolved under various legal frameworks, including the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). Initially, civil courts dealt with a wide range of cases, while criminal courts focused on criminal offenses. The establishment of the Supreme Court and High Courts further strengthened India’s judicial architecture to handle constitutional and appellate cases.

To address the growing caseload, the Indian government introduced the tribunal system through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976, aiming to manage specialized disputes. However, despite these reforms, case pendency continues to rise.

Key Issues Contributing to Judicial Delay and Pendency

• Judge-to-Population Ratio - India currently has 21 judges per million people, far below the recommended 50 judges per million as per the 120th Law Commission Report. The shortage of judges directly contributes to the growing backlog of cases.
• Vacant Judicial Positions - As of late 2024, 30% of High Court positions remain vacant, exacerbating the case pendency crisis. The delay in filling these vacancies has resulted in overburdened judges, further delaying case resolution.
• Legislative Overload - The enactment of laws without conducting prior judicial impact assessments leads to an increase in the number of cases, often without considering the capacity of the judiciary to handle them. This lack of foresight results in excessive pressure on courts.
• Overworked Judiciary - Judges often face a heavy workload, with some handling multiple responsibilities across different courts. This overburdening leads to mental fatigue, increased errors, and prolonged decision-making.
• Witness Delays - The absence of witnesses and delays in their appearance in court can significantly prolong the judicial process, contributing to case pendency.

Government Initiatives and Challenges

• • National Judicial Infrastructure Plan (NJIP): The NJIP aims to modernize judicial infrastructure, improving court functioning and case processing. However, its full implementation across the country remains a work in progress.
  • E-Courts Project: The E-Courts project aims to digitize the judicial process, including e-filing and virtual hearings. This initiative has shown promise in reducing procedural delays but still requires wider application.
  • Tribunal System: While tribunals were introduced to reduce the burden on regular courts, their success has been limited, and the abolition of six tribunals in 2021 has added additional pressure on High Courts.
  • Case Timeline Legislation: Laws prescribing time-bound adjudication for sensitive cases have been enacted, but due to inefficiencies in the system, deadlines are rarely met.

Recommendations for Reform

• • Enhance Judicial Strength

• • Increase the Judge-to-Population Ratio: The government should prioritize the appointment of judges to meet the 50 judges per milliontargets.
  • Fill Vacant Positions: High Courts should fill vacant positions six months in advance to ensure a steady supply of judges.

• • Judicial Impact Assessment
• Implement Judicial Impact Assessments: The Justice M. Jagannadha Rao Committee’s recommendation for judicial impact assessments should be made mandatory. Every new Bill should assess the likely increase in judicial workload, the required number of judges, and the necessary infrastructure.
  • Promote Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

• • Encourage ADR Mechanisms: Mediation and arbitration should be promoted as cost-effective alternatives to court proceedings. Public awareness campaigns and legal reforms can encourage the use of ADR.

• • Strengthen Infrastructure and Technology

• Modernize Court Infrastructure: The judiciary should invest in technology such as e-filing and virtual hearings to reduce administrative burdens and expedite case resolutions.
• Streamline Administrative Processes: Technology can also help automate administrative tasks, thereby reducing the workload on judges and speeding up case processing.

• Limit Adjournments

• Stricter Norms for Adjournments: Judicial bodies should enforce stricter norms for granting adjournments, ensuring that they are not used excessively.
• Oversight Mechanism: An independent body can monitor the frequency of adjournments and take corrective action if needed.

Conclusion

Addressing the issue of judicial adjournments and case pendency requires a comprehensive approach involving structural reforms, better resource allocation, and the adoption of technology. Strengthening the judiciary’s infrastructure, increasing judicial appointments, and promoting alternative dispute resolution are vital steps toward ensuring quicker, fairer justice. The collaborative efforts of the judiciary, government, and society at large are essential to ensuring that India’s judicial system can meet the demands of justice in a timely and efficient manner.