Context: This article is based on the news “Supreme Court report shows shortage of 4,200 courtrooms for judges” which was published in the India Today. The Centre for Research and Planning of the Supreme Court of India has recently released the “State of the Judiciary report”. 

Key Insights from the State of the Judiciary Report 

• India has an estimated population of 139 crore and over 5 crore pending cases. 
• Pendency of Cases: As of 1 September 2023, around 4.4 crore cases are pending in District Courts across India, compared to about 60.75 lakh cases pending in the High Courts and 80,550 cases in the Supreme Court.

Continue Reading: Judicial Pendency – Indian Courts Are Facing a Severe Backlog of Cases

• Role of Infrastructure: The pace and quality of adjudication depends on the number of judges and support staff, and adequate judicial infrastructure, which increasingly involves Information and Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure.

About State of the Judiciary Report:

• About Report: The “State of the Judiciary: A Report on Infrastructure, Budgeting, Human Resources, and ICT”, is released by the Centre for Research and Planning.
• Objective: This Report on the ‘State of the Judiciary’ studies the present state of India’s justice delivery efforts, focusing on the High Courts and the district judiciary. 
  • This Report has been prepared in line with the vision of the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, to strengthen the working of the judiciary.
• The Report is structured in four Parts: 
  • Part I: Judicial Infrastructure. 
  • Part II: Budgeting for the District Judiciary. 
  • Part III: Human Resource Management. 
  • Part IV: ICT Enablement of Judiciary.

Challenges faced by the Indian Judiciary

• Infrastructure Gap of Judicial Infrastructure: 
  • Lack of Courtrooms and Residential Units: For the sanctioned strength of 25,081 judges in the district judiciary, there is a shortage of 4,250 courtrooms and 6,021 residential units. 
    • For example, the Andhra Pradesh and Gauhati High Courts have a shortage of 38% and 30% of courtrooms respectively. 
  • Lack of Inclusive and Secure Infrastructure: There is lack of childcare facility, separate washrooms for PwDs, parking spots etc. 
    • For example, only 30.4% of District Court complexes have separate washrooms for PwDs, and other infrastructural support such as tactile paving, and wheelchairs is available in less than 30% of the court complexes.
• Lack of Proper Human Resource Management:
  • Shortage of Judges: As against the total sanctioned strength of judges, there is a shortage of 5,300 judges in the district judiciary. In the High Courts, there is a vacancy of 347 judges against the sanctioned strength of 1,114 judges.
  • Lack of Women in the Judiciary: Women constitute around 36.3% of the working strength of the district judiciary. In the High Courts and Supreme Court, women constitute 13.4% and 9.3% of judges respectively
  • Lack of Compliance with Recruitment Timelines: The Supreme Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan v. U.P. Public Service Commission prescribed a schedule for the regular recruitment of judges in the district judiciary. 
    • For the District Judge (Direct Recruitment) exam, only Nagaland (106 days), Odisha (132 days) and Andhra Pradesh (142 days) completed the recruitment process within the apex Court’s timeline, whereas Punjab & Haryana and Jammu & Kashmir took 1,270 and 1,173 days respectively to complete their Higher Judicial Services recruitment processes.
  • Lack of Representation of Marginalised Sections in District Judiciary: For instance, 84.5% of the total 168 seats reserved for the ST category remain unfilled in the six States examined in the report.
• Lack of ICT Enablement of Judiciary: Insufficient integration of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) obstructs the judiciary’s ability to adapt to modern legal demands, impeding the timely delivery of justice and diminishing overall judicial effectiveness.
  • For instance, only 57.4% of courtrooms in the district judiciary have video-conferencing-enabled computers on the judge’s desk.
• Lack of Budget Allocation:  The gaps in the current state of infrastructure in the district judiciary stem from the delay in allotment of land, lack of funds in some States, lack of effective coordination among the implementation agencies and lack of optimum utilisation of funds.
  • For instance, in the Union Budget 2023-24, the Ministry of Law and Justice allocation is 4,752 crore, approximately 0.1% of the total budget estimate.

Major ICT Initiatives Associated with India Judiciary

• National Judicial Data Grid: Inaugurated in 2015, the NJDG is a major step towards transparency and accountability as it provides aggregate data on the institution, disposal, and pendency of cases on a near real-time basis in courts across the country to the public.
• e-Court Services: A portal enables the litigant to obtain information on pending cases in District and High Courts. It also serves as a personalized digital case diary for the litigant who can use ‘My Cases’ to get automatic updates concerning multiple cases. 
• Video Conferencing: ‘Access to justice’ was subjected to a unique challenge during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The judicial system responded by harnessing video conferencing technology to ensure justice delivery. 
• Virtual Courtroom System: Courts moved to a hybrid video conferencing mode post-pandemic. A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, in Sarvesh Mathur v. The Registrar General of High Court of Punjab and Haryana, issued several directions to ensure the continued use of video conferencing facilities across High Courts and Tribunals.
• e-Filing: The electronic filing facility has enabled lawyers to cut costs and save time by filing documents from any part of the country in any District Court or High Court.
• Fast and Secured Transmission of Electronic Records (FASTER): The FASTER system proposes transmission of e-authenticated copies of the interim orders, stay orders, bail orders, and record of proceedings to the duty-holders for compliance and due execution, through a secured electronic communication channel.
• Interoperable Criminal Justice System (ICJS): ICJS is an initiative to enable the seamless transfer of data and information among different pillars of the criminal justice system, like courts, police, jails, forensic science laboratories, etc., on one platform. 

Way Forward to the Indian Judiciary

• Improve Funds Allotment and Utilisation: The Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for developing infrastructural facilities for the judiciary may be revised to allot funds concerning the sanctioned strength of judges in District Courts and not the working strength. 
  • Further, the mandatory conditions under the CSS may also be relaxed for the timely release and utilization of funds. 
  • A standard format of Utilisation Certificates (UCs) is also important to ensure transparency and uniformity in the UCs.
  • An Outcome Budget (a document that sets out measurable outputs and outcomes to be achieved in a financial year) should also indicate the progress made in previous years along with the output targets fixed for the next financial year, as is done in Delhi.
• Timely Recruitment of Judges: There is also a need for a dedicated Division Bench in the High Courts for the timely disposal of cases related to recruitment of judges in the district judiciary. 
  • The recruitment authorities in the States should also publish a ‘tentative schedule’ for all the stages of the examination for recruitment of judges.
  • States need to take active steps to fill the unfilled vacancies in reserved category to ensure that candidates from marginalised communities can become a part of the district judiciary. 
• Enable Efficient ICT: For speedier and more effective ICT enablement, it is necessary that there is an uninterrupted internet connectivity in court premises for achieving best results as envisioned under the e-Courts project.
  • A permanent IT Cadre in the district judiciary and regular training of judges, staff and lawyers to strengthen the technical workforce and for capacity building is the need of the hour. 
• Inclusive and Accessible Infrastructure: There is a need to notify a ‘designated post’ for looking after the children in creches in District Courts and explore space in the existing structures to make court complexes disabled-friendly. 
  • There should also be a comprehensive pool of sign language interpreters in every court whose services may be utilised to ensure accessibility in legal settings.
• Dedicated Land Bank for Infrastructure Projects: A dedicated land bank where the judiciary’s share is earmarked may ease the process of identification and allotment of suitable land for infrastructural projects.
• Timely Project Completion: There is a need to adhere to timelines for completion of projects under construction by the concerned State agencies, as per the time stipulated in the Nyaya Vikas portal. 
  • The Nyaya Vikas Portal should be regularly updated to provide real-time data and enhance transparency and accountability. 
  • There is a need for a body at the Central level to ensure better coordination, monitoring and effective budget utilisation.
• Ensure Safety and Security: In light of Pradyuman Bisht v. Union of India, there is a need to set up permanent Court Security Units, strict access control mechanisms, and adequate CCTV installation in each court complex to ensure a secure infrastructure. 
  • Further, a Disaster Management Plan may also be formulated per the Disaster Management Act, 2005, to inculcate a disaster preparedness culture amongst the district judiciary. 

Conclusion:

The State of the Judiciary Report highlights urgent reforms needed in India’s judicial system to improve infrastructure, human resources, budget allocation, and technology for timely and accessible justice.