Judicial Backlog in India

India’s judicial system is facing a serious backlog of cases, with over 4.8 crore cases pending across various courts. Many cases have been pending for decades, highlighting the urgent need for judicial reforms.

Pendency Across Courts

• Supreme Court: Approximately 82,500 cases are pending, with around 50% over a year old.

• High Courts: About 60 lakh cases are pending, with 55% over a year old. Notably, Allahabad and Bombay High Courts together account for over 17 lakh pending cases.

• District Courts: Around 4.8 crore cases are pending, with about 59.76% over a year old.

Top States by Pendency: Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, and Rajasthan.

Casewise Distribution:

• Civil Cases: 1.1 crore pending; 56.91% over a year old

• Criminal Cases: 3.7 crore pending; 60.62% over a year old

• Pre-litigation Matters: 13 lakh pending; 52.37% over a year old

Key Reasons for Judicial Backlog

1. Shortage of Judges

• India has only 21 judges per million people, much below the recommended 50 judges per million.

• Approximately 30% of High Court posts and 20% of District Court posts are vacant.

• Bench strength is insufficient, with only 34 judges handling over 70,000 new cases annually.

2. Low Case Disposal Rates

• In a recent month, only 12.8 lakh cases were disposed, whereas nearly 20 lakh cases were filed.

• Slow disposal contributes significantly to the growing backlog.

3. Procedural Delays and Inefficiencies

• Frequent adjournments, Special Leave Petitions (SLPs), and poor documentation cause delays.

• Many courts rely on manual processes and have inadequate automation.

• Delays in judge appointments from collegium recommendations exacerbate the problem.

4. Infrastructure Deficits

• Many courts lack basic amenities, digital tools, and sufficient staff.

• Incomplete digitization and poor inter-court data synchronization slow down justice delivery.

5. Limited Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

• Lok Adalats, mediation, and other ADR mechanisms are underutilized, leading to unnecessary pendency.

6. Pandemic-Related Backlog

• COVID-19 lockdowns contributed an additional over 3 million pending cases between 2020 and 2022.

Impacts of High Pendency of Cases in India

1. Economic and Business Disruption

• A slow judiciary negatively affects economic growth, as investors hesitate to invest where contract enforcement takes over four years on average.

• According to the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index, India performs poorly in “Enforcing Contracts.”

• Economic growth cannot be sustained if the rule of law moves slower than markets.

2. Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

• Prolonged litigation erodes the credibility of the legal system.

• Both victims and accused suffer from uncertainty and psychological stress due to delayed justice.

3. Vulnerable Groups Affected

• Women: 8% of pending cases are filed by women.

• Senior Citizens: 7% of pending cases involve senior citizens.

4. Strain on Judicial Resources

• Judges are unable to spend sufficient time on complex cases, leading to a decline in the quality of judgments.

5. Cycle of Litigation

• The government is the largest litigant, contributing to nearly 50% of all cases.

• This creates a vicious cycle where new cases outnumber disposals, worsening the backlog.

Reform Measures

1. Digital and AI Initiatives

• eCourts Phase III (2023–2027): Introduces unified case data and AI-based case listing systems.

• AI Projects:

  • SUPACE (Supreme Court): AI-assisted case management

  • SUVAS: AI translation tool to reduce human workload

2. Infrastructure Development

• National Judicial Infrastructure Authority (NJIA): Streamlines funding and construction of court complexes.

• Virtual Hearings Expansion: Continues in the Supreme Court and 25 High Courts post-pandemic.

3. Fast-Track and Specialized Courts

• 1,023 Fast-Track Courts operational nationwide, primarily for women and child-related cases.

Way Forward

1. Judicial Efficiency and Contract Enforcement

• Judicial speed must match India’s economic ambitions.

• Appeals should be restricted to cases involving substantial legal or constitutional questions, preventing higher courts from being clogged.

• Comparative models, such as in Singapore and the UK, show that efficiency and fairness can coexist.

2. Bar Council and Legal Profession Reforms

• Bar Council of India (BCI) reforms are necessary to ensure merit-based opportunities instead of reliance on connections.

• Indian Judicial Service (IJS): Could democratize opportunities for young professionals.

• Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025: Proposed accountability through limited government representation but was rejected, highlighting the need for reform.

3. Fairness for Junior Advocates

• Mandatory stipends and apprenticeship contracts should be institutionalized.

• Whistle-blower protections and POSH compliance must be universal.

• An independent Grievance Redressal Tribunal should replace politically influenced bar mechanisms.

• Legal Profession Regulation Bill: Needed to standardize pay structures, continuing legal education, audits of Bar Councils, and Senior Advocate designations.

4. Procedural Reforms to Reduce Delays

• Adjournments should be limited and justified.

• Accountability for delayed judgments must be enforced.

• AI-based case clustering and digitized docket management should replace manual processes.