Answer

Introduction

Judicial pendency in India is not solely due to inadequate judge strength but also reflects infrastructural deficiencies. The concept of ‘judicial slumisation’ highlights how poorly designed court complexes constrain efficiency and delay justice delivery.

Body

Judicial Slumisation

• Spatial Congestion: Overcrowded corridors and courtrooms reduce functional efficiency.
• Poor Acoustics: Lawyers often struggle to hear judges in packed courtrooms, forcing them to raise voices in poorly designed halls.
• Haphazard Growth: Unplanned expansion leads to disorganised infrastructure.
  Eg: Incremental retrofitting of courtrooms in older complexes due to rising pendency without architectural planning.
• User Discomfort: Poor physical environment reduces litigant confidence.
  Eg: Lack of basic amenities and cramped waiting areas.
• Exclusionary Design: Lack of inclusive facilities restricts access.
  Eg: Several High Courts lack creche facilities despite mandates under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.

Infrastructure –Delay Link

• Movement Delays: Lawyers handling multiple cases across courtrooms within the same complex often miss turns due to distance and congestion. 
• Adjournment Practice: Coordination failures lead to frequent postponements.
  Eg: “Pass-overs” and proxy appearances disrupt schedules.
• Docket Disruption: Serial listing system fails without spatial coordination.
• Access Barriers:  Overcrowded parking and entry bottlenecks delay timely access to court complexes.
• Administrative Inefficiency: Poor layout affects registry and staff operations.
  Eg: The National Case Management System 2024 notes infrastructure impacts efficiency of stakeholders.

Reimagine Courts

• Integrated Complexes: Co-located courts improve coordination and reduce delays.
  Eg: NCMS 2024 emphasises integrated infrastructure planning.
• User-Centric Design: Infrastructure should cater to all stakeholders.
  Eg: South Africa’s Constitutional Court reflects citizen-centric design.
• Inclusive Access: Ensure accessibility for vulnerable groups.
  Eg: Provision of barrier-free access and creche facilities.
• Design Standards: Develop uniform architectural guidelines.
  Eg: US (New Deal era) and Japan courtroom design frameworks.
• Expert Planning: Involve architects and planners in court design.

Conclusion 

Addressing judicial pendency requires improving both human and physical capacity. Eliminating ‘judicial slumisation’ through planned, inclusive, and efficient court infrastructure is essential to enhance case disposal, accessibility, and public confidence in the justice system.

DOWNLOAD PDF