Context:

• According to the National Judicial Data Grid, more than 5 crore cases are pending under different courts of India. Such a high number affects the speedy justice delivery in the country.
• In this context, concerns have been raised on the issue of vacation periods for Courts. Beyond vacations, many other reasons contribute to the high pendency in Indian courts.

Reasons for High Pendency in Indian Courts

• Low Number of Judges and high vacancies: India has only about 21 judges per million people, far below the recommended 50 judges per million. 
  • Vacancies in high courts average 30%, and subordinate courts face a 22% shortfall, with some states experiencing even higher vacancies.
• High Volume of Government Litigation: The government is the largest litigant, responsible for roughly 50% of the court load. This includes inter-departmental litigation and routine appeals in service matters.
• Complex Dispute Resolution System: The slow and complex judicial process contributes significantly to case backlogs.
• Inadequate Court Resources: Delays are exacerbated by a lack of courtrooms, support staff shortages (averaging 26%), and procedural inefficiencies.
• Quality Deficits: Variability in the proficiency of judges and lawyers, along with procedural delays and the permissive legal culture, contribute to the backlog.
• Slow Adoption of Technology: Technological solutions are underutilised due to slow and uneven adoption, erratic electricity, and uneven bandwidth.

Measures Taken by the Government

• • Investment in Court Infrastructure: Under a Centrally Sponsored scheme, the Government has been continuously investing and developing court infrastructure.
  • e-Courts Mission Mode Project allows for using information and communication technology (ICT) for IT enablement of district and subordinate courts.
    • In the upcoming phase III, this project aims to usher in a regime of maximum ease of justice by moving towards digital, online and paperless courts. 
    • It intends to incorporate the latest technology such as Artificial Intelligence(AI), Block chain etc to make justice delivery more robust, easy and accessible to all the stakeholders. 
  • Specific laws: With a view to reduce pendency and unclogging of the courts, the Government has recently amended various laws like the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2018, the Commercial Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018, the Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018, the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019 and the Criminal Laws (Amendment) Act, 2018.

• Alternate Dispute Redressal Mechanism(ADR): ADR mechanisms have been promoted through the creation of institutions like the Lok Adalat. Also new laws come with the clause of using ADR before going to the Court.

• LIMBS Project (2015): Legal Information Management Briefing System connects 55 ministries for better litigation management, tracking 620,000 pending government cases.
• Administrative Reforms: Proposals for permanent administrative secretariats and court managers to relieve judges from administrative tasks have been suggested but not fully implemented.

Suggested Solutions to Address Pendency

• Increase the Number of Judges: Appoint more judges to handle the vast number of pending cases, meeting the recommended ratio of 50 judges per million people.
• Efficient Government Litigation Management: Fully implement the National Litigation Policy, especially to avoid routine service matter appeals.
• Encourage Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Promote mediation, arbitration, and other ADR mechanisms to reduce court burdens.
• Utilise Technology: Enhance technology use in courts for case management, tracking, and virtual hearings.
• Specialised Tribunals: Establish more specialised tribunals for specific case types to ensure quicker resolution.
• Legal Awareness and Assistance: Improve public awareness of legal rights and provide better legal aid to reduce frivolous litigation.
• Higher Standards for Judges and Lawyers: Set higher entry standards for judges and lawyers to improve the quality of legal proceedings.
• Increased Funding: Allocate more resources to the judiciary to improve infrastructure, hire additional staff, and implement technological solutions.
• Court Timings and Vacations: Extending court sessions and reducing vacations could help but are not sufficient alone. Structural reforms are essential.

Conclusion: 

• Across the world, as incomes and ownership rise and commerce and industry grow, recourse to formal systems of adjudication increases and must be welcomed because it signals trust in a robust system of conflict resolution. In India’s case, the number of litigations are going to increase in the coming days. The Judicial setup should be updated to clear the pending cases and prepare itself for the future surge of the cases.