Abstract:
The judiciary, recognized as the third branch of government, is regarded by the populace as the sole independent entity, fostering trust among citizens due to its impartiality and autonomy from other governmental branches. Despite being the most trusted institution, it is increasingly losing its significance as a result of delays in the administration of justice. In response to this challenge, various reforms have been implemented, including the establishment of tribunals, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, and fast-track courts, all aimed at expediting the judicial process. However, these measures have yet to yield significant improvements and the India being the top most country for having high pending cases than any other nation in the world. This research paper will examine the backlog of cases, identify the underlying issues, and propose potential solutions especially referring to the district courts.
Key words:
Black coat syndrome, culture of adjournments, case management system, infrastructure, need for decisive action.
Introduction:
A negative reputation in court that has persisted for a long time continues to be a topic of discussion till today, namely, “justice delayed.” Recently, President Murmu spoke during a two- day conference conducted by the Supreme Court at Bharat Mandapam, New Delhi, from 31 August to 1 September 2024, at a farewell session for the National Conference of District Judiciary[1]. President Murmu has introduced a new phrase “black court syndrome,” likening it to “white coat hypertension” or white coat syndrome, which is an unusual condition observed in individuals during their medical or doctor appointments. The white coat signifies doctors, causing individuals who have clinical appointments or sudden doctor visits to experience a rise in blood pressure compared to their typical surroundings. Therefore, individuals whose blood pressure rises solely when seeing their doctors, akin to how citizens feel anxious and fearful when attending court, are said to exhibit blackcoat syndrome, as the president has mentioned. In this context, the black coat symbolizes judges, lawyers, and others. The anxiety and fear felt by citizens due to delays in justice lead to a loss of hope and trust in the judiciary system, highlighting a critical issue that deserves attention.
Research methodology:
The research paper is of descriptive nature and the research is based on primary sources for the deep analysis of the delay in justice and reasons for pendency of cases especially in the view of district courts. Secondary sources of information like articles, reports by government and websites are used for this research.
Significance of district court:
The reason for the prevalence of black coat syndrome among the citizens is attributed to delays in justice caused by a backlog of cases. The National Judicial Data Grid, which reports on cases filed, disposed of, and pending in all three tiers of the judiciary nationwide, shows that there are approximately 46.5 million pending cases[2] in the district courts, more than in high courts and the Supreme Court. President Murmu highlighted the district courts as central to this ‘’black coat syndrome’’ since they are the first point of contact for individuals filing cases. Those who approach the courts come with significant expectations of resolving their issues, but due to the backlog, district courts are overwhelmed and unable to address cases promptly, resulting in delayed justice. They serve as the foundation of India’s judicial system, handling the majority of cases impacting citizens’ daily lives; therefore, it is crucial to focus on the district court and enhancing the district judiciary would aid in restoring trust among the population.
NJDG of district court on pending cases:[3]
The total number of cases pending in the district court for 2024 is 4,64,95,122, as per the National Judicial Data Grid. Among these, there are 1,09,67,637 civil cases pending and 3,55,27,485 criminal cases pending. The alternative dispute resolution, which alleviates the court’s burden by reducing case backlogs, indicates that the number of Pre-Litigation / Pre-Trial cases awaiting resolution is 12,20,536.
The primary issue highlighted in the National Judicial Data Grid regarding case delays is the unavailability of counsel. Currently, there are 875,756 pending cases attributed to this factor, which significantly contributes to the backlog. The lack of available counsel can be attributed to various reasons, including financial constraints faced by individuals and a shortage of lawyers in certain areas, underscoring the need for an increase in the number of practicing attorneys. Another critical factor is the delay caused by “awaiting documents.” Given that legal proceedings are governed by procedural codes, it is imperative that advocates adhere to established protocols. Advocates should be mandated to ensure that all necessary documents are prepared and ready prior to filing a case, thereby facilitating a smoother process and minimizing adjournments. Additionally, the issue of “witnesses and parties not interested” necessitates that the court issue strict summons to the relevant parties. This would involve soliciting their input and obtaining necessary approvals to expedite case resolutions. Furthermore, legal representatives not officially recorded should also receive notifications at their residences, prompting them to respond to summons and clarify any delays, which would assist in the efficient disposal of cases.
Other factors for the cause of delay in the justice:
- Increase in number of judges: the law commission in the 120th report on Manpower planning in judiciary in the year 1987[4] stated that ‘’It is advised that the current ratio of 10.5 judges per million population be gradually elevated to 50 judges per million population.’’ And recently in the 2023 the Law ministry answered the Lok Sabha on 9th February 2024[5] showing the increase in number of judges per million i.e. in the Supreme Court has risen from 31 in 2014 to 34, with no current vacancies. Since May 2014, the Government has appointed a total of 62 Supreme Court Judges, averaging approximately 6 appointments per year. Regarding the High Courts: Judges has grown from 906 in 2014 to 1,114 as of December 31, 2023. In total, 968 High Court Judges have been appointed during this period, averaging around 103 appointments annually. Furthermore, the District Judiciary has increased from 19,518 judicial officers in 2014 to 25,439 as of December 31, 2023.
- Vary in Infrastructure: The infrastructure within the courts plays a vital role in ensuring their efficient operation, enabling judges to address matters with confidence and allowing them to dedicate ample time to court proceedings. A key focus for enhancing infrastructure should be the district and Taluk courts, as these serve as the initial point of contact between the public and the judicial system. Given that the majority of cases are initially filed in these courts, it is essential to create a conducive environment and ensure appropriate facilities that offer comfort to the judges.
- Lack of proper knowledge in advocates: To comprehend the dynamics of addressing the bar and the bench, it is crucial to recognize their significant role in resolving legal disputes. Therefore, it is imperative for advocates to possess a thorough understanding of the law. The pathway to becoming a lawyer is relatively accessible, as there are no age restrictions for individuals aspiring to enter the profession. Moreover, anyone, regardless of their initial knowledge, can claim the title of lawyer and pursue a career as an advocate. At the state level, the concept of the Law Common Entrance Test (LAWCET) should be reformed. Individuals aspiring to become lawyers must be equipped with extensive knowledge and undergo rigorous examinations designed to enhance their understanding and improve their ability to articulate cases effectively before the bench. Implementing standardized tests such as the LSAT and CLAT at the state level for all prospective law students would facilitate a more efficient legal process and contribute to the seamless operation of the judicial system.
- Due to amendments: due to amendments the advocates and the system are under the confusion in solving the cases which are resulted in the pending of cases in fact there were even petitions filed when the new criminal laws were amended and led to a lot of confusion to various advocates and
- Unnecessary filing of lawsuits: On 8th may 2023 The Supreme Court conveyed its discontent regarding the tendency of both central and state governments to submit ‘frivolous’ and ‘unnecessary’ appeals. Justice BR Gavai remarked, “Forty percent of the litigation initiated by the union and state governments is superfluous.”[6] Hence it is essential to state to the advocates to not take up the matter which are frivolous and needless to reduce the overload pendency of the cases and save the valuable time of the court. Advocates ought to refrain from pursuing such cases solely for the purpose of financial gain, as this practice places an undue burden on judges who invest significant time and effort in these matters.
- Focus on the particular areas which have high cases: As to know most of the cases which is dealt in the district courts are land and property cases. If the system focuses on this particular area to improve by providing extra staff working on property and land cases and by providing a committee to report on it most of the pending cases would be disposed. Even in the criminal cases the area of murder, theft
Culture of adjournments:
President Murmu during her farewell speech on 1st September has stated that the source of the worry is the ‘’culture of adjournments’’ the adjournments of cases load the burden on the litigants as according to the Rule of Order 17 [7]of Civil Procedural Code which states the burden of bearing the litigant cost for adjournments is on parties of the suit this making the litigants to suffer and cause of fear in the justice system. Even Hon’ble Chief justice Sanjive Khanna on December 10th during the Human Rights Day 2024 [8]celebrations organized by National Legal services Authority (NALSA) stated his concern over the daily wage earners such as rickshaw pullers who spend their daily wages. The case has the habit of adjourning cases more than disposing the reasons for such adjournment might be:
- More number of cases
- Lack of witnesses and essential documents
- Parties themselves seek the adjourns
- As stated above no presence of legal representative
- Unavailability of lawyer
Under Order 17 of Civil Procedural Code, 1908 speaks on process of adjournments [9]
Rule 1: Granting of adjournment in which it highlights the point that adjournment shall be granted more than three times to a party during hearing of the suit, conditions of adjournment
In Chandra Prakash Ojha vs District Judge And Ors. on 12 January, 2004 [10]It may be mentioned that under Order XVII, Rule 1, C.P.C. it is specifically provided that no adjournment shall be granted more than three times during hearings of suits. In our opinion, even these 3 adjournments cannot be claimed as of right, as adjournment is in the discretion of the Court, and cannot be claimed as of right.
Rule 2: when court has adjourned the case and if parties fail to appear the court on that day the court can dispose the case in any one mode as prescribed in order 9 of the CPC.
The Supreme Court case Gayathri v M. Girish[11] underscores the problem of recurrent adjournments and their role in exacerbating the backlog of cases within the judicial system. This case examines the tendency of litigants to treat adjournments as an entitlement, often neglecting the importance of court proceedings. Here are some other cases and laws related to adjournments:
- The Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
According to Section 346 of BNSS[12] deals with power to postpone or adjourn proceedings in this the section restricts the culture of adjournments and is intended to discourage unnecessary adjournments by judges.
- Right to fair and speedy trial as a fundamental right
Article 21 of the Indian constitution which talks about right to life and personal liberty also includes the right to fair and speedy trial.
• In the case of Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab [13], the Supreme Court affirmed that the principle of a speedy trial is a fundamental component of Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court stated that the right to a speedy trial commences with the arrest of the accused and their subsequent detention, extending throughout all phases of investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, and revision. This ensures that any prejudice resulting from unnecessary and avoidable delays is prevented. A fair trial is regarded as the cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence.
This code grants a maximum of three adjournments. It also states that adjournments can only be granted when circumstances are beyond the control of the requesting party.
- The Consumer Protection Act, 1986
According to the section 13 (3A) of the Consumer protection Act 1986 [14]states that a verdict in a case should be pronounced within three to five months.
- Arrears committee
A committee typically set up to handle the disposal of long-pending cases in the court system is called an “Arrears Committee” especially in the high courts [15]. The committee is also known as Justice J.C. Shah Committee. These committees are established at both the High Court and District Court levels to actively monitor and address cases that have been pending for an extended period.
Case law
Anil Rai v. State of Bihar AIR (2011) SC 3173[16]
In this case law The Supreme Court issued directives concerning the issuance of judgments, which are intended to be adhered to by all judicial bodies. The Court expressed disapproval of the Patna High Court judges for the unwarranted postponement in rendering the judgment.
Case management system
The technology system comprises a software application that encompasses all pertinent details regarding the client, documents, and other critical records. It manages case files from filing of the suit to disposal of that suit. It systematically organizes every aspect, including deadlines. This system is vital for minimizing case backlogs, as it facilitates judges in reviewing matters efficiently, enabling them to render judgments without obstacles. The streamlined access to data significantly reduces the time required to examine case details.
For the first time, following the directive issued by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Salem Advocates Bar Association vs. Union of India [17], the Committee established by the Supreme Court has disseminated Model Rules through a Consultation Paper directed to the High Courts, Bar Councils, and Bar Associations. Several responses have been received regarding this paper. In the Consultation Paper developed by the Committee appointed by the Supreme Court, an effort has been made to elucidate the concept of ‘Case Management’
Further, On 14th Feb, 2024 supreme court stated for the need of case management [18]
In depth analysis of National conference on the District Judiciary [19]
The conference, inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and concluded by President Murmu, was conducted under the guidance of Hon’ble Chief Justice DY Chandrachud. It comprised six sessions, evenly distributed over two days. On the first day, the initial session addressed “infrastructure and human resources.” Mr. Krishnamurthy Mishra, Principal District Judge of Jabalpur, noted that while some districts have made strides in infrastructure, many others still lack essential facilities. He emphasized the need to focus on the disparities in development across regions, as numerous areas remain inadequately equipped to provide basic amenities. Furthermore, Dr. Sukhda Pritam and Mr. Amarendra Kumar highlighted the increasing backlog of cases and underscored the importance of crèche facilities, the e-filing system, electronic video linkage (EVL), and medical services, all of which are crucial for enhancing technological infrastructure.
Session 2: on the topic of ‘’Courtroom for all: Creating inclusive spaces in judiciary. In this session, Justice B V Nagarathna emphasized the importance of increasing the representation of women in judicial roles. She further noted that the practice of assigning cases related to juvenile justice and family disputes to female judges reinforces existing gender stereotypes. Additionally, there was a significant emphasis on developing model court policies that prioritize inclusivity for women, marginalized communities, and individuals with disabilities. Justice Nagarathna also highlighted the importance of appointing an equal number of men and women as arbitrators among young lawyers to foster a balanced gender ecosystem.
Session 3: The session addressed the theme of “Judicial Wellness for Judges in India: A Comprehensive Perspective,” emphasizing the judicial profession’s inherent responsibilities, demanding workloads, and emotional challenges. These factors considerably impact the well-being of judges. The discussion advocated for the incorporation of yoga and mindfulness meditation practices and practises of AYUSH among judges. Additionally, it proposed the organization of regular social events, peer support groups, and mentorship programs to foster a sense of community within the judicial system.
Session 4: This session focuses on the subject of “Case Management.” Justice Dipankar Datta addressed the judge-to-population ratio, which stands at 21 judges per million individuals. The Supreme Court’s “Action Plan for Arrears Reduction (APAaR-DJ)” was introduced as a vital initiative aimed at addressing the prolonged backlog of cases. This action plan is founded on the principles of prioritizing long-standing cases, effectively utilizing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), and reviewing the progress of cases. Justice Datta elaborated on the implementation of the action plan, which is structured into three phases.
Phase I: (April-June 2024) will concentrate on establishing a district case management committee in each district, conducting physical verifications of cases, and preparing lists of target cases. Additionally, senior police officers or public prosecutors will be involved, along with the appointment of a senior nodal officer from the revenue department to expedite final decree proceedings.
Phase II: (July- December 2024) The objective is to address cases that have been pending for 10 to 20 years, 20 to 30 years, and those exceeding 30 years, adhering to the timelines established in the Action Plan. Additionally, it includes the identification and resolution of the 50 oldest cases in both regular and special courts.
Phase III (January to June 2025) The initiative seeks to resolve outstanding cases that have been pending for over a decade. It will prioritize the resolution of the oldest execution petitions, address issues or charges in cases experiencing delays exceeding one month after the completion of pleadings, and expedite the disposal of interim applications that have been pending for more than three months. This underscores the essential role of technology in case management, with a particular emphasis on leveraging the JustIs App, the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), and the ‘Urgent Case’ feature within the Case Information System (CIS). Additionally, it aims to tackle the shortage of public prosecutors in district courts by utilizing Lok Adalat and mediation, as well as implementing virtual court hearings for the specified cases.
Session 5: on the topic of Judicial training: Curriculum and methods. The session concentrated on the educational dynamics within judicial training, highlighting the necessity for organized experiences at various phases of a legal career to facilitate effective growth. Additionally, the concept of Human Resource training was discussed as a means to enhance communication between junior and senior judges.
Session 6: the final session on the topic Bridging the Gap particular emphasis on fostering effective collaboration between District Court Judges and High Court Judges to facilitate seamless operations. The discussions highlighted the necessity for standardized transfer policies for District Judges, which currently exhibit inconsistencies and a lack of clarity. Additionally, the importance of the evaluation work conducted by Administrative Judges was addressed. The presentation critiqued the practice of grouping all judges together for evaluation purposes and underscored the need for a more refined approach, utilizing the 20:70:10 formula. This formula would classify exceptional judges in the top 20 percent, average judges in the middle 70 percent, and those needing improvement in the bottom 10 percent.
Is imposing the time frame is the solution of disposal of cases:
There was the petition filed by a petitioner who stated for disposal of cases within the fixed timeframe i.e. 12 and 36 months [20]. but Hon’ble former chief justice has stated it was not American supreme court to set a time frame for disposal of the cases and also it was unachievable as it has high number of pending cases.
Hence, the petition is stating, for disposal of cases within the period of 12 months and 36 months which would be unachievable but a period of 1 year by setting up a committee and focusing on the areas especially the prolonged delays would be a useful way for disposing cases. Further the rule of adjournment shouldn’t cross the limit of 3 times will ensure for reduction of pending cases hence this rule should be followed strictly and even the widening its rule and making it as fundament will ensure at least in getting fast justice to the people and reduction in piling of the cases.
Conclusion:
Despite the existence of numerous articles, cases, committees, and even recent conferences such as the National Conference on the District Judiciary, significant changes have yet to materialize. Many judges have raised concerns regarding the delays in the justice system, but these discussions have not led to tangible improvements. It is imperative that we move beyond mere dialogue and take decisive action. A more structured approach, including regular updates from the committee to the public, could enhance accountability and efficiency within the legal system. Furthermore, attention must be directed towards offenders who have been unjustly incarcerated for extended periods, as they are the true victims of this situation. The prolonged experience of life behind bars severely impacts their well-being and reintegration into society.
Author:
Tarini Aleti (2nd year)
Pendakanti Law College, Hyderabad
[1] Supreme Court of India, Supreme Court of India to Organise a Two-Day National Conference of the District Judiciary, SCI, <https://www.sci.gov.in/supreme-court-of-india-to-organise-a-two-day-national-conference-of-the-district-judiciary/>
[2] National Judicial Data Grid, National Judicial Data Grid, NJDG, https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdg_v3/
[3] National Judicial Data Grid, National Judicial Data Grid, NJDG, https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdg_v3/
[4] Press Information Bureau, Press Release on December 10, 2002, PIB, https://archive.pib.gov.in/release02/lyr2002/rdec2002/10122002/r101220022.html (published Dec. 10, 2002).
[5] Press Information Bureau, Press Release on December 10, 2002, PIB, https://archive.pib.gov.in/release02/lyr2002/rdec2002/10122002/r101220022.html (published Dec. 10, 2002).
[6] Lok Sabha, Annexure to Question No. AU 1335, https://sansad.in/getFile/loksabhaquestions/annex/1715/AU1335.pdf?source=pqals
[7] Ministry of Law and Justice, The Constitution of India, India Code, https://indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/2191
[8] LiveLaw, Black Coatt Syndrome: On Human Rights Day, CJI Sanjiv Khanna Highlights Deep-Seated Fear of Legal System in Marginalized Communities, LiveLaw, https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/black-coatt-syndrome-on-human-rights-day-cji-sanjiv-khanna-highlights-deep-seated-fear-of-legal-system-in-marginalized-communities-277932 (published Dec. 10, 2024).
[9] Ministry of Law and Justice, The Constitution of India, India Code, https://indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/2191
[10] Indian Kanoon, Vikram Singh v. Union of India, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/92443428/
[11] Indian Kanoon, Rajeev Ranjan v. Union of India, authored by Justice R. B. Mishra, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/182085688/
[12] KanoonGPT, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Arrangement of Sections, Chapter XXVI, Section 346-A, https://kanoongpt.in/bare-acts/the-bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita-2023/arrangement-of-sections-chapter-xxvi-section-346-a48d9b5e60a28275
[13] Indian Kanoon, Ravindra Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, authored by Justice S. N. Shukla, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1813801/
[14]Indian Kanoon, State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram, authored by Justice S. P. Kothari, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1977503/
[15]AdvocateKhoj, Assessment of Statutory Frameworks of Tribunals in India: The High Courts’ Arrears Committee Report – 1972, https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/lawreports/assessmentofstatutory/13.php?Title=Assessment%20of%20Statutory%20Frameworks%20of%20Tribunals%20in%20India&STitle=The%20High%20Courts%27%20Arrears%20Committee%20Report%20-%201972 (published 1972).
[16] iPleaders, Anil Rai v. State of Bihar, 2001, https://blog.ipleaders.in/anil-rai-vs-state-of-bihar-2001/
[17] Indian Kanoon, State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal, authored by Justice R. S. Garg, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/342197/
[18] LiveLaw, Supreme Court Case Management: Adjournment Letters and Cases Pendency, LiveLaw, https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-case-management-adjournment-letters-cases-pendency-249514
[19] Government of India
https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3ec0490f1f4972d133619a60c30f3559e/uploads/2024/11/2024110889.pdf (published Nov. 8, 2024).
[20] Economic Times, SC Junks Plea for Cases Disposal Within Fixed Time, Says Not American Supreme Court, Economic Times, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/sc-junks-plea-for-cases-disposal-within-fixed-time-says-not-american-supreme-court/articleshow/114346499.cms?from=mdr