Reasons Behind Judicial Pendency

Source-This post on Reasons Behind Judicial Pendency has been created based on the article “Blaming court vacation for pendency misses the real problem” published in “The Indian Express” on 30 May 2024.

UPSC Syllabus– GS Paper-2– Structure, Organization and Functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary

Context– The article explores the debate surrounding the work hours of judges and the issue of pending cases in India’s judicial system. It highlights the misconception that longer court sessions and reduced vacations for judges would significantly alleviate the backlog of cases.

According to the India Justice Report, as of June 2020, a case remained pending in subordinate courts for three years and in high courts for five years on average.

What is the current status of judicial vacancies in India?

No state has filled its complete quota of judges, whether in the high courts or the numerous lower courts. On average, high courts have a vacancy rate of 30%, but it can reach nearly 50%. Subordinate courts have an average vacancy rate of 22%. However, Bihar and Meghalaya have vacancy rates exceeding 30%, persisting for over three years.

What are the factors that lead to high judicial pendency?

1) Lack of Judges– India has only 15 judges per 10 lakh population, far below the Law Commission’s 1987 recommendation of 50 judges per 10 lakh population.

2) Lack of Basic Infrastructure– There’s a shortage of courtrooms, and many existing ones aren’t ideal. Nationally, there’s a lack of support staff, averaging 26%.

3) Legal Expertise and Ineffective Communication-Varying levels of skill and knowledge among both lawyers and judges result in continuous procedural delays. Additionally, when there’s a mismatch in language skills, clarity of arguments, and final decisions, it increases the number of appeals.

4) Lack of Legal Ethics and Culture-A culture within the legal profession that is permissive and potentially collusive enables the proliferation of unfounded applications, continuous adjournments, and meritless appeals. Lawyers employ tactics to deliberately prolong the trials.

5) Obstacles to Technological Integration in Court- Adoption of technology in courts is hindered by inconsistent access to electricity, uneven internet bandwidth, and resistance from users.

6) Challenges in Judicial Reform Initiatives -Efforts such as mandatory mediation, Lok Adalats, specialized courts, and prioritizing specific cases have been implemented. However, they face similar structural deficiencies.

Read more- The challenges of criminal justice system in India

What should be the way forward?

Solutions require collaboration between state and central governments. A few solutions are as follows-

1) Government litigation currently constitutes approximately 50% of the caseload in courts. Thus, steps are needed to rationalize and trim this.

2) There is a need to evaluate the potential financial and time consequences of every newly introduced legislation at the pre-legislative stage, and they should be put in the public domain. This may result in better-crafted legislation and reduce the unnecessary burden on the courts.

3) Obsolete laws and procedures should be revised or removed to decrease the number of legal cases.

4) There is a need to appoint long-term court managers who can relieve judges of many routine tasks and help in designing systems for maximum efficiency.

5) There is a compelling need to establish more rigorous criteria at the initial stage before individuals are appointed as judges, irrespective of whether it is for higher or lower courts.

6) The India Justice Report estimates that the overall per capita spending on judiciary stands at less than Rs 150.Thus, the government should enhance budgetary allocation to improve the access and quality of justice delivery.

Question for practice

What are the factors that lead to high judicial pendency in India? What steps can be taken to address this issue?