 "Justice delayed is justice denied: India's tryst with judicial backlogs")
The current judges-to-population ratio in India is estimated at 17 judges for every million citizens –far lower than most developed and even developing countries in the world.
The United States has 151 judges for each million of its population. Even China, despite its 1.3 billion population, has a far higher ratio of 170 judges per million people.
According to a quick analysis, the poor judges-to-population ratio explains why there is a consensus on the plight faced by India’s justice delivery machinery with some experts estimating that at current rates of disposal the backlog would take a mind boggling 466 years to clear.
The issue has been the topic of much thought and discourse both in judicial as well as administrative circles but to little avail – the country still faces a backlog of more than 30 crore cases across various courts. Currently, the pendency of cases in the Supreme Court is around 60,000 matters and the figures in the various High Courts and subordinate judiciaries are around 30 lakh and 2.7 crore, respectively.
These numbers are particularly relevant in the context of Supreme Court Chief Justice T S Thakur’s emotional outburst at a conference with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Ministers of states on April 24 where he made an impassioned plea to confirm the appointment of more judges in order to attempt to rectify the present situation. He highlighted how the Supreme Court of India had disposed 2,600 cases last year as compared to a mere 81 by the US Supreme Court during the same period and that the Indian judiciary was working “under very stressful conditions.”
He also mentioned how the issue had been consistently neglected for the last three decades by successive governments due to which, “justice continues to be an illusion” for large sections of the society. While further elucidating on the present condition and in particular the current system of judicial retirement, the Chief Justice remarked, “At this stage, to ask a judge to go home (after retirement) is criminal.” He has also proposed Saturday hearings in the Supreme Court to deal with the issue at the apex forum.
More From This Section
The former Chief Justice of India H L Dattu was also deeply concerned during his tenure with this grave state of affairs and took it upon himself to reduce case admissions in the Supreme Court, much to the disappointment of the members of the bar. In fact, the Law Commission in as early as 1987 had called for a fivefold increase in the number of judges to ease the judge-to-population ratio and increase rates of case disposal. The situation, though, remains roughly the same today, especially when considering the 30 crore increase in population since that time.
Large judicial vacancies also add to this current crisis and multiple administrative tussles such as the long drawn deliberations on the National Judicial Appointments Commission for instance are often cited as reasons. Currently there are around 5,000 vacancies in the judiciary across the courts in the nation. Over the years, many calls have also been made to increase budgetary allocations and provide more financial autonomy to the judiciary but the amounts allocated still hover around a mere 0.2-0.4% of the Union Budget.
Another reason for the present scenario can be attributed to the country’s appellate structure. Disproportionately high numbers of cases are referred to the higher courts due to insufficient punitive measures in place to dissuade vexatious appeals and wastage of the time of the courts. Unlike many Scandinavian countries, there are no such measures are in place that statutorily increase the amount of damages initially awarded when an appeal is unsuccessful, barring exceptional cases.
The 245th report of the Law Commission in 2014 highlights several other reasons for India’s current judicial situation and suggests sweeping changes to the structure and functioning of the courts to remedy the issue based on Ideal Case Load, Time Based and Rate of Disposal methods in addition to the ‘judge-to-population’ ratio.
The long-standing issue has been promised to be addressed appropriately by the Prime Minister and the current government in last Sunday’s conference. Whether the event shall establish the beginnings of a holistic redressal mechanism for judicial backlogs shall have to be awaited with much bated breath. India will have to play a fine balancing act between judicial propriety and judicial timeliness in the years to come if the country’s legal system is to withstand the test of time.