Justice delayed, justice denied: Pending legal cases in India cross over 4.41 cr

Supreme Court of India. File photo

'JUSTICE delayed is justice denied.' This adage implies that if legal redress or equitable relief is available to an injured party but is not provided promptly, it is essentially the same as having no remedy at all. One of the reasons for delayed justice in the country is the staggering number of pending cases in the courts. The total number of pending cases has crossed over 4.41 crore nationwide, with Maharashtra alone accounting for over 50 lakh. These alarming statistics have raised concerns among social activists, practising advocates, and the former central information commissioner, who expressed their concerns and suggested solutions to tackle these glaring numbers, as per the National Judicial Data Grid records on July 15.

Pending cases decay democracy

Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, a trustee of the Watchdog Foundation, stated, "The piling of cases across various courts in India is a sure sign of a decaying democracy. Politicians have consistently lagged behind in delivering justice to the masses because it serves their vested interests. The need of the hour is an overhaul of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. PC) to address procedural inefficiencies causing undue delays. Infrastructural changes such as increasing the number of courtrooms, transitioning to online hearings, and appointing more judges are necessary."

"To curtail the filing of frivolous cases, the losing party should bear the cost of litigation. Judges' appointments should be made without interference, which is often a cause for concern. It is unfortunate that the state government is neglecting to fill vacancies in quasi-judicial bodies like MahaRERA. Even a member of the appellate tribunal recently retired without a replacement. The non-filling of vacancies is affecting the delivery of justice. Despite highlighting the issue of vacancies, the present state government seems more focused on its own survival than solving matters of public interest," added Pimenta.

Lack of infrastructure

Solicitor Stuti Galia highlighted multiple reasons for case pendency, including a shortage of judges, lengthy procedural and technical requirements, frequent transfer of judges, and a lack of resources and infrastructure. Additionally, in many cases, regulatory/government departments fail to address grievances adequately. This leads to a significant number of cases pending against or involving these departments. Galia emphasised that if regulatory/government departments effectively discharge their duties, citizens would not need to approach courts, thus reducing the burden on the judiciary.

Galia further noted, "It is often observed that lower court/tribunal judges lack effective specialisation, leading to frequent reversals of their judgments by higher courts. This increase in appeals against lower court/tribunal decisions contributes to the backlog."

Solution

To address these challenges, several solutions are proposed. Firstly, the number of courts needs to be increased by establishing more benches and appointing additional judges. Structural modifications and new mechanisms are necessary. Additionally, many courts still lack modernisation and digitalisation, making the entire system inefficient. Instances where judges do not sit without prior intimation, resulting in the discharge of the entire board, cause a significant loss of time for all parties involved, including lawyers and litigants. Vacancies should be filled promptly, and the quality of legal education across the country needs improvement. The working of the courts should be enhanced by providing quality infrastructure, modernisation, and expanding the use of technology and facilities to encourage more aspiring lawyers to choose a career in the judiciary.

Vigilant about legal and constitutional rights

Advocate Rajeshwar Panchal, who practices in the Bombay High Court, echoed similar concerns, stating that the significant backlog of cases reveals two key issues. Firstly, there is a lack of regular appointments of judicial officers, resulting in courts and tribunals remaining vacant or operating with limited staff. Secondly, the government has not increased the number of judicial officers proportionately to the growing population. The high pendency also indicates that people are becoming more vigilant about their legal and constitutional rights, leading them to approach the court. Additionally, there is a lack of mechanisms to hold anyone accountable for the backlog. Notably, the higher judiciary lacks representation from all classes, and reservation policies do not apply. As a result, judicial offices are primarily occupied by individuals selected based on merit rather than reservation. However, the substantial pendency exposes the shortcomings of the merit-based system, which some quarters of society allege compromises merit.

Highly alarming

Advocate Floyd Gracias, a Supreme Court counsel, expressed great concern over the large number of pending cases, emphasising that the law and the legal system act as a deterrent against illegal acts and crimes. The high pendency implies that delayed justice can be seen as justice denied, which undermines the deterrence principle established by various schools of criminology and penology.

Solution

Gracias stressed the imperative of enhancing the system, developing infrastructure, and reducing the backlog of litigation. However, he also urged lawyers and litigants to consider the situation and avoid unnecessary adjournments, be prepared for proceedings, and proceed accordingly when listed before courts. These practices would save a significant amount of time for the courts and the judicial system, ensuring speedy justice for all.

Advocate Floyd Gracias, Advocate Shreeprasad Parab, Solicitor Stuti Galiya, and Shailesh Gandhi, former Central Information Commissioner.

Way forward

Constitutional expert Advocate Shreeprasad Parab highlighted the need for reforms in India's judicial process, which is based on the colonial system. Parab pointed out positive changes that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as courts transitioning to online platforms and the use of email and WhatsApp for summons delivery. However, he emphasised that the piling up of cases should not be the reason for these transformations. Parab proposed several solutions, including encouraging young lawyers to join the judiciary through training integrated into the law college curriculum, promoting mediation and settlements before resorting to litigation, implementing online filing of cases and documents, digitalising administrative judicial work, and improving the infrastructure of courts to support virtual proceedings. Special courts dedicated to legal heirship and succession matters could help reduce the workload on higher courts. Furthermore, educating people and lawyers about alternative dispute resolution methods like arbitration, conciliation, and mediation would discourage rushing to courts.

In an interview, Shailesh Gandhi, former Central Information Commissioner, shared his thoughts on the issue.

Q) What does the number bring to your mind? What is your first thought?

Ans: The number brings to mind the fact that many other countries are actively working to reduce delays in their courts. India, on the other hand, is setting a world record that is unlikely to be broken. We are continuing on a downward slide with no roadmap for correction.

Q) Do you agree with the fact that in India 'Justice is not only delayed but also denied'?

Ans: Absolutely. The ones who suffer the most are the poor. The rich and powerful wrongdoers can manipulate the system to expedite or delay their cases as they, please. Articles 14 and 21 are routinely violated in our courts. We cannot claim to have a functioning justice system.

Q) The situation is worst in quasi-judicial bodies like MahaRERA, which was established to address grievances of flat buyers within three months of registering the complaint. However, the waiting time for the first hearing is now two to three years? what is your view?.

Ans: These quasi-judicial bodies are taking inspiration from the judiciary, which lacks the moral authority to discipline them.

Q) What is the way forward? Do you have any suggested solutions?

Ans: An analysis of data from the Supreme Court website for a twelve-year period reveals that the average increase in the backlog was less than 3% per year, while the vacancies in sanctioned positions of judges exceeded 21%. It is evident that if vacancies are kept under 5%, the pendency would decrease each year. Additionally, if the infrastructure is a bottleneck, approximately 30% of courts could operate in two shifts. The nation must prioritise these measures.

Here are the pending court cases statistics for All India and Maharashtra, sourced from the National Judicial Data Grid as of July 14, 2023:

All India Pending Court Cases:

- Civil Cases: 11,022,076

- Criminal Cases: 33,123,173

- Total Cases: 44,145,249

Pending Court Cases in Maharashtra:

- Civil Cases: 11,022,076

- Criminal Cases: 33,123,173

- Total Cases: 44,145,249

Here is the breakdown of year-wise pending cases (civil and criminal) across India, sourced from the National Judicial Data Grid: