India Waiting for Justice: Delay in Courts Deepens the Crisis in the Judicial System – Rohit Pandey

New Delhi (Ashok Kumar Nirbhay) – The growing number of pending cases and the weaknesses in the judicial framework have raised ongoing concerns. Rohit Pandey, former Secretary of the Supreme Court Bar Association and thinker, has expressed deep concern over the increasing backlog in courts, limited resources, and the urgent need for judicial reforms. According to him, India’s judicial system has been under immense pressure for years, pushing it slowly towards a serious crisis.
The primary reason for judicial delays in India is the extremely low number of judges and weak infrastructure. The 120th Report of the Law Commission (1987) had warned about India’s judge-to-population ratio, comparing it with developed nations. India has only 10.5 judges per 10 lakh people, whereas the numbers in the U.S. (107), Canada (75.2), Australia (41.6), and the UK (50.9) are much higher. In 1981, the U.S. population was a third of India’s, yet it had 25,037 judges, while India had only 7,675 judges at that time.
The central government has not been able to fulfill the Law Commission’s recommendation to increase the number of judges to 107 per million by the year 2000. The Supreme Court also issued directions in the “All India Judges Association vs. Union of India” case (2003) to increase the number of judges by 10 per million every year and to set a minimum ratio of 50 judges per million. However, this too has not been implemented.
The courts need more judges, more courtrooms, and modern infrastructure, but the budget allocation is significantly lower. In the 10th Five-Year Plan, the judiciary was allocated only 0.078% of the total budget, and in the 9th Plan, just 0.071%, which is insufficient to meet even basic needs.
Rohit Pandey believes that to reduce the burden on traditional courts, the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system must be strengthened. Methods such as arbitration, reconciliation, panchayat, and “mediation” have legal recognition but remain underutilized. Although Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code amended the law to include ADR in judicial processes, its impact remains limited without coordination from the government and social organizations.
To curb frivolous lawsuits, courts should impose strict punitive costs. There is a growing need for a central law like the British-era “Vexatious Litigation Prevention Act.” Strengthening judicial bodies at the village level for minor crimes is also considered crucial.
Procedural negligence in village courts, village councils, and lower courts must be eliminated. Delays in witness statements, non-compliance with the rule of delivering judgments within 30 days, and unnecessary prolonged arguments are major causes of delay in justice. There is also a need to reform the appeals process by adopting a “One Appeal Policy” to reduce the number of cases.
A law to set time limits for cases, similar to the “Speedy Trial Act-1974” in the United States, should be implemented in India as well. The successful “Shift System” trial in Gujarat should be extended to courts across the country.
The establishment of 1,734 fast-track courts based on the recommendations of the 11th Finance Commission has resolved a significant number of cases. Now, such a system should be extended to the magistrate level. Mobile courts could also play an important role in raising legal awareness and strengthening public trust in rural areas.
Most legal experts believe that if decisive reforms are not introduced soon, India’s judicial system could reach a point of no return. This is the time for the government to take concrete steps to strengthen the justice system and reduce the burden of pending cases.