Pendency of court cases in India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pendency of court cases in India is the delay in the disposal of cases (lawsuits) to provide justice to the aggrieved person or organisation by judicial courts at all levels. The judiciary in India works in hierarchy at three levels - federal or supreme court, state or high courts, and district courts.[1] The court cases is categorised into two types - civil and criminal. In 2023, the total number of pending cases of all types and at all levels rose above 50 million or 5 crores, including over 169,000 court cases pending for more than 30 years in district and high courts.[2][3][4] 4.3 crore out of 5 crore cases, i.e more than 85% cases, are pending in district courts as of December 2022.[2] Government itself is the biggest litigant, having 50% of the pending cases being sponsored by the state.[5][6] Land and property disputes account for the largest set of pending cases. About 66% of all civil cases in India are related to land and property disputes; and 25% of all cases decided by the Supreme Court involve land disputes.[7]

India has the largest number of pending court cases in the world.[8] Many judges and government officials have said that the pendency of cases is the biggest challenge before Indian judiciary.[9] According to a 2018 Niti Aayog strategy paper, at the then-prevailing rate of disposal of cases in our courts, it would take more than 324 years to clear the backlog.[10] At that time in 2018, the pending cases stood at 29 million. With the cases taking time in courts, it leads to delays in the delivery of justice for both victim and accused. In April 2022, a court in Bihar state acquitted a man of murder for lack of evidence after he spent 28 years in jail.[11]

Pendency of cases cost 1.5%-2% of India's GDP.[12] Rule of Law Index 2023, a country ranking published by the World Justice Project, ranked India at 111 out of 142 countries in the civil justice, and 93 out of 142 countries in the criminal justice.[13] U.S News & World Report ranked India at 60 out of 87 countries with "Well-developed legal frameworks".[14]

Causes of pendency[edit]

Low strength of judges and non-judicial staff[edit]

In 2022, the sanctioned strength of judges in India was 21.03 judges per million population.[15] The absolute sanctioned strength of judges were 34 in Supreme Court, 1108 in high courts, and 24,631 in district courts.[16] Law commission of India and Justice V S Malimath Committee had recommended in the past to raise the strength of judges to 50 judges per million population, or 20,000 population per judge.[17][18]

The sanctioned strength of judges of the Supreme Court of India can be increased by the Parliament passing a law.[19][20] The sanctioned strength of judges of a High Court can be increased by the High Court making a recommendation and after it has been approved by the respective state government, its governor, the Chief Justice of India and the union government.[21][22]

Vacant position of the judges[edit]

Despite the sanctioned strength of judges, courts in India have often not worked in full capacity due to vacancy of judges. In 2022, the working strength of judges in India was 14.4 judges per million population.[18] It has changed marginally from 13.2 in 2016.[23] In comparison, the strength of judges are 210 judges per million in Europe and 150 in the United States.[18] Non-judicial staff positions also remain vacant with some states having vacancy upto 25% in 2018-19.[24]

Vacancies in courts keep on arising periodically due to retirement, resignation, demise, or elevation of judges.[25] The appointment of judges is a long process. Supreme Court judges are recommended for appointment by the Supreme Court collegium, consisting of the Chief Justice of India and the four remaining senior-most judges of the Supreme court.[26][19] The names have to be approved by the union government before being appointed by the President.[26]

The high court judges are recommended for appointment by the High Court collegium consisting of the Chief Justice of the High Court, and two remaining senior-most judges of the high court.[27][28] The names have to be approved by the state government, the governor, the Chief Justice of India, and the union government before being appointed by the President.[27]

The union government and the state government are binding to abide by the suggestion of the Chief Justice of India, the Chief Justice of the High court and their collegium in the appointment of the judges.[27][19] However, the rule is seldom followed in time and the union government would delay the appointment or return the names for appointment. As per rule, the union government must approve the appointments in 3–4 weeks if the collegium reiterates the names.[29][30]

The lack of coordination and cooperation is a major cause for the vacancy in the higher judiciary.[31] In some cases, the appointment of judges has been delayed for 4 years due to the names pending with the union government for approval.[32]

The district or lower court judge appointments in a state are made by the respective high court, the governor, and the State Public Service Commission.[33] The exams are conducted for the appointment of the district judges and the civil judges. The examination for the civil judges appointment is conducted by the State Public Service Commission in 10 states only; while all other examination for the judge's appointment in a state jurisdiction is conducted by the High Court themselves. The examination and appointment process are not efficient. In 2018, Supreme Court noted that there was a mismatch in the number of posts vacant in the lower courts and the recruitment underway.[33] In 2022, Bihar Public Service Commission took 30 months just to complete the examination.[34] The union government has proposed setting up AIJS (All India Judicial Service) to tackle vacancies in the lower judiciary by centralising the recruitment process.[35]

Lower judiciary suffers also from not attracting and retaining talented judges, and lack of career progression. Many judges have been quitting the judiciary to go into private practice or join top private law firms, as it offers a lot more in terms of remuneration.[36] Many states have been criticised for the pay offered to lower court judges. Recommendations of the Judicial Pay Commission and the Supreme Court orders to increase the judges salary are not implemented by the states.[37] In Delhi Judiciary exam 2019, 66 percent seats could not be filled as candidates were simply unable to score even the cut off marks.[36] In Jammu and Kashmir judiciary exam 2019, not one candidate passed the district judge exam for the fourth consecutive time.[33] In Tamil Nadu judiciary exam 2019, of around 3,500 lawyers appearing for the district judge examination, none passed.

Inadequate funding[edit]

Except the Supreme Court which is funded by the central government, all the expenses of the High Court and the District Courts in a state are funded by the respective state government. As of 2018, 92% of all expenditure on the judiciary was borne by the states.[38] This includes salary of judges, non-judicial staff and all operation costs. In 2019, India spent 0.08% of its GDP on the judiciary.[39] All states and union territories allocated less than 1% of its annual budget on the judiciary, except Delhi with 1.9%.[39] There is no guideline for the state expenditure on the judiciary to ensure higher efficiency of the judiciary.[39]

In comparison, United States spends 2% of its annual budget on judiciary.[40]

Lack of infrastructure[edit]

District or lower courts are prone to lack of infrastructure. In 2022, there were only 20,143 court halls and 17,800 residential units for judicial officers available to use against the sanctioned strength of 24,631 lower court judges.[41] Only 40% of the lower court buildings have fully functional toilets with some having no provisions for regular cleaning. Lower courts also suffer from the lack of digital infrastructure, video conferencing rooms, and video connectivity to jails and officers.[42] Development of the infrastructure facilities for judiciary rests with the State Governments.[43] In 2021, Chief Justice N V Ramana had proposed to set up NJIAI (National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India) to perform administrative work of the judiciary including infrastructure development.[41] In comparison, there are similar body within Judiciary in other countries, for example, Administrative Office of the United States Courts in US.[44]

Abuse of legal procedure[edit]

Court cases proceed as per rules described in CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) and CPC (Code of Civil Procedure). CrPC and CPC have been criticised for being archaic. Though amendments were made to CPC in 1999 and 2002, which fixed 30-90 days time limit for different rules in the CPC, and allowed maximum three adjournments. However, Supreme Court of India struck down these amendments in 2005, citing their inherent powers.[45] Adjournments and non-compliance of rules have been used as tools to delay the proceedings.[46] Lawyers unrestrictedly argue with unrelated oral arguments and submit impractical, long written pleadings to waste time and delay the proceedings.[47]

In contrast, while hearing a case in October 2022, Supreme Court of India concluded the hearing in only 8 days after it set the time limits for arguments, and allowed no repetitions.[47] In 2023, Supreme Court of India while expressing concern, again recommended the time limits in CPC to avoid delay in the proceedings.[48]

In CrPC, one rule does not allow criminal cases to proceed if either an accused or a witness is not present before the court.[49][50][51] This rule alone accounts for the delay in over 60% of all pending criminal cases, as per NJDG in November 2022.[2]

Corruption and apathy of officials helps in the aiding and abetting abuse of the legal procedure.[52]

Singapore, which derived its civil procedure code from the English Law similar to India, used to have delays of upto 10 years in the disposal of civil cases in the 1990's. These delays were largely due to the abuse of civil procedure by the contesting parties. However, after the judicial reforms, the delays became negligible and Singapore now ranks among the top countries with civil and criminal justice system.[53]

Parliament of India has passed two new laws in 2024, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Act, 2023 which replaced the CrPC and the Indian Evidence Act. The union government claims that the new laws will provide justice in criminal cases within 3 years.[54]

Ineffective executive and legislative[edit]

The disputes and complaints that arise are not resolved by the executive government to the satisfaction of the aggrieved individual and in a fair manner. Laws passed by the legislative may have loopholes. The ineffectiveness of the legislative and the executive administration has led to the docket explosion of cases in the courts. Judges have criticised that the executive and the legislative are not using their full potential which is leading to bad governance and hence putting the burden on the courts.[55][56]

State-wise statistics[edit]

Courthall shortfall is calculated as lack of courthalls as percentage of the total sanctioned strength of the judges.[24] A negative percentage means courthalls are in excess. Case clearance rate (CCR) is cases disposed in a year as a percentage of new cases filed in the same year.[24] CCR of less than 100 means case pendency will increase, CCR equal to 100 means case pendency will remain same, CCR of more than 100 means case pendency will decrease. NA: Not Available. (Source: India Justice Report, 2022).[57]

State/UT Budget per capita on judiciary (Rs.) (2020–21)[57] Population per High Court Judge (2022)[57] Population per Lower Court Judge (2022)[57] Courthall shortfall (%) (2022)[57] Case clearance rate of High Court (2022)[57] Case clearance rate of Lower Court (2022)[57]
India 146 1,765,760 71,224 14.7 95 89
Andaman and Nicobar Islands (UT) 337 1,833,444 30,923 NA 121 76
Andhra Pradesh 145 1,765,733 109,673 - 4.0 73 90
Arunachal Pradesh 199 1,681,917 44,229 36.6 90 NA
Assam 99 1,681,917 82,274 13.4 90 72
Bihar 83 3,674,088 92,259 20.2 113 93
Chandigarh (UT) 517 933,333 40,633 - 3.3 103 76
Chhattisgarh 99 2,131,143 67,964 2.7 77 89
Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu (UT) 50 1,941,636 195,000 - 14.3 72 97
Delhi (UT) 581 465,889 30,695 32.5 88 71
Goa 498 1,941,636 39,175 - 6.0 72 113
Gujarat 139 2,523,143 60,280 1.1 92 117
Haryana 270 933,333 63,367 27.7 103 82
Himachal Pradesh 278 743,100 45,870 13.7 80 95
Jammu and Kashmir (UT) 190 920,267 57,225 38.2 127 74
Jharkhand 115 1,855,667 66,842 4.6 101 96
Karnataka 193 1,372,816 63,162 14.3 82 95
Kerala 233 964,892 74,546 5.8 156 113
Ladakh (UT) 313 920,267 33,222 47.1 127 81
Lakshadweep (UT) 302 964,892 34,000 0.0 156 NA
Madhya Pradesh 129 2,759,613 55,587 24.0 84 91
Maharashtra 172 1,941,636 64,645 - 7.3 72 92
Manipur 150 1,064,667 76,048 33.9 99 103
Meghalaya 192 1,106,000 65,059 46.5 128 103
Mizoram 298 1,681,917 29,927 35.4 90 111
Nagaland 187 1,681,917 92,208 11.8 90 63
Odisha 118 2,007,364 56,983 16.9 131 90
Puducherry (UT) 152 1,448,870 146,182 - 38.5 107 114
Punjab 251 933,333 50,892 14.9 103 100
Rajasthan 147 3,082,808 63,513 15.9 65 96
Sikkim 635 227,667 32,524 28.6 111 97
Tamil Nadu 165 1,448,870 71,351 9.3 107 98
Telangana 157 1,148,697 92,231 - 3.1 103 95
Tripura 238 1,369,667 37,697 32.8 107 104
Uttar Pradesh 104 2,332,970 93,021 25.4 96 72
Uttarakhand 193 1,645,429 42,502 21.1 81 86
West Bengal 75 1,833,444 107,412 17.6 121 80

References[edit]

  1. ^ "Department of Justice | India". Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  2. ^ a b c "Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid". njdg.ecourts.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  3. ^ "Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid for High Courts of India". njdg.ecourts.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  4. ^ "Justice delayed: Over 1 lakh cases in lower courts more than 30 years old". India Today. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  5. ^ "Half of judiciary's problems due to state-sponsored litigation: NV Ramana". www.business-standard.com. Press Trust of India. 2022-09-24. Retrieved 2023-01-20.
  6. ^ "CJI terms govts as biggest litigants, says docket explosion due to executive, legislature". The Economic Times. Retrieved 2023-01-20.
  7. ^ "Understanding Land Conflict in India and Suggestions for Reform". CPR. 2021-12-21. Retrieved 2023-11-24.
  8. ^ "India has world's largest backlog of court cases: PM". NDTV.com. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  9. ^ "Pendency of court cases 'huge challenge': Chief Justice N. V. Ramana". The Hindu. 2022-08-26. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  10. ^ "44 million pending court cases: How did we get here?". Moneycontrol. 5 December 2021. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  11. ^ "India's huge backlog of court cases delays justice: Experts". www.aa.com.tr. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  12. ^ B.S, Surya Prakash (2016-12-15). "Examining the funding deficit of the judiciary". mint. Retrieved 2022-11-07.
  13. ^ "WJP Rule of Law Index". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2023-11-24.
  14. ^ "These Countries Have the Most Well-Developed Legal Frameworks".
  15. ^ "India has about 21 judges per million people". The Economic Times. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  16. ^ Poddar, Umang (6 August 2022). "India's lower courts are sitting on 4 crore cases. Filling judicial vacancies must be a priority". Scroll.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  17. ^ SMSala. "Pendency in Indian Judiciary". Rising Kashmir. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  18. ^ a b c Gera, Ishaan. "Only 14.4 Judges Per Million Population". Rediff. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  19. ^ a b c "Article 124 of Indian Constitution".
  20. ^ "Supreme Court Judges". pib.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-13.
  21. ^ Bench, Bar & (9 June 2021). "Central government approves increase in sanctioned Bench strength of Telangana High Court by 75 percent after intervention by CJI NV Ramana". Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news. Retrieved 2022-11-13.
  22. ^ "Telangana High Court strength increased from 24 to 42 judges". The News Minute. 2021-06-10. Retrieved 2022-11-13.
  23. ^ "India: number of judges 2020". Statista. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  24. ^ a b c "India Justice Report 2020" (PDF).
  25. ^ "Understanding vacancies in the Indian judiciary". PRS Legislative Research. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  26. ^ a b "Memorandum of procedure of appointment of Supreme Court Judges | Department of Justice | India". Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  27. ^ a b c "Memorandum of procedure of appointment of High Court Judges | Department of Justice | India". Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  28. ^ "Article 217 of Indian Constitution".
  29. ^ "'Not Acceptable': SC Slams Union Govt Over Delay in Clearing Collegium-Approved Judges". The Wire. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  30. ^ "SC Collegium Sent 106 Names for Judges, 9 for CJs, but Centre Cleared Only 8 Names: CJI". The Wire. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  31. ^ "Faceoff: Centre objected but Supreme Court Collegium firm on 12 names for HCs". The Indian Express. 2021-09-05. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  32. ^ "After 4 years of delay, Centre to clear appointment of Sadiq Wasim Nagral as judge of J&K High Court". The Indian Express. 2022-05-31. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  33. ^ a b c Poddar, Umang (6 August 2022). "India's lower courts are sitting on 4 crore cases. Filling judicial vacancies must be a priority". Scroll.in. Retrieved 2022-12-20.
  34. ^ "Bihar Public Service Commission Result" (PDF).
  35. ^ "Explained: Lower judiciary and centralised recruitment debate". The Indian Express. 2021-11-05. Retrieved 2022-12-20.
  36. ^ a b "Here is why there will be a lot of lower judiciary vacancies in the coming years Lawsikho Blog". lawsikho.com. Retrieved 2022-12-20.
  37. ^ Bureau, The Hindu (2022-11-25). "Judicial officers demand implementation of revised pay scale". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 2023-01-12.
  38. ^ Suresh, Nileena (2022-02-22). "Explained: How The Union Budget Funds India's Justice System". www.indiaspend.com. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  39. ^ a b c "India Justice Report 2019" (PDF).
  40. ^ "Criminal Justice Expenditures: Police, Corrections, and Courts". Urban Institute. Retrieved 2022-11-24.
  41. ^ a b Sahoo, Niranjan (2022-07-20). "Indian judiciary is crying for basic infrastructure. Here's what Centre & states need to do". ThePrint. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  42. ^ Singh, Soibam Rocky (2021-12-06). "Judicial infrastructure, a neglected case". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  43. ^ "National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India". www.pib.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  44. ^ "Agency". www.usgovernmentmanual.gov. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  45. ^ Ranjan, Brajesh. "What causes judicial delay? Judgments diluting timeframes in Code of Civil Procedure worsen the problem of adjournments". The Times of India. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 2023-12-10.
  46. ^ "Frequent adjournments leading to pendency of cases at consumer courts: Experts". www.daijiworld.com. Retrieved 2022-11-07.
  47. ^ a b "Buried in Words: Supreme Court Struggles with Long Submissions". Supreme Court Observer. Retrieved 2022-11-07.
  48. ^ "Pendency of cases: Supreme Court issues directions for speedy disposal of civil cases". India Today. Retrieved 2023-12-10.
  49. ^ Bhaumik, Aaratrika (2022-05-06). "'Archaic Law': Calcutta HC Recommends Amendments To CrPC To Allow Trial In Absentia Of An Absconding Accused To Secure Rights Of Sexual Abuse Victims". www.livelaw.in. Retrieved 2022-11-07.
  50. ^ "'Judges say HC stay, absconding accused reasons behind cases pending for decades'". The Times of India. March 25, 2019. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  51. ^ Varghese, Hannah M. (2022-01-14). "Must Prove Accused Is Absconding With No Immediate Prospect For Arrest To Record Witness Deposition U/S 299 CrPC: Kerala High Court". www.livelaw.in. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  52. ^ "Official apathy delays the case that may put an end to the pendency of criminal appeals in India – The Leaflet". theleaflet.in. 2022-05-24. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  53. ^ "JUDICIAL REFORM: RESHAPING THE CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN SINGAPORE" (PDF).
  54. ^ "New laws replacing IPC, CrPC to come into effect on July 1". The Times of India. 2024-02-25. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 2024-04-07.
  55. ^ "By not doing job, executive and legislature are burdening courts: CJI Ramana". The Indian Express. 2022-04-30. Retrieved 2024-01-18.
  56. ^ "Govts biggest litigants, docket explosion due to exec, legislature: CJI".
  57. ^ a b c d e f g "India Justice Report 2022" (PDF).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendency_of_court_cases_in_India&oldid=1217824921"