- There have been reams of articles written about the country’s depressing state of pending judicial cases at all levels of the judiciary. Citizens and other concerned stakeholders have expressed their dismay and distress at the length of time it takes the country’s judicial system to render judgments. Millions of cases are pending in various courts across the country, reflecting the gap in the justice system and highlighting how little progress has been made to ensure common citizens receive timely relief. Even the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court, is overburdened with thousands of cases, demonstrating how cumbersome and time-consuming the justice system is in India.
PC: PTI
- Millions of undertrials are also languishing in various courts due to a lack of completion of the hearing and subsequent judgment, painting a bleak picture. Since the plights of millions of people remain unknown despite years of searching for justice, the wheels of justice have come to a halt. We are aware that several courts continue to be understaffed, with numerous vacancies for judges. It is also one of the factors contributing to the delay in the delivery of justice. While we’re on the subject, it’s worth noting that a Delhi High Court judge issued 65 judgments on her last working day. This instance sends a message that is not covered by the cases. It is not only the judge’s responsibility to ensure that cases are resolved quickly.
- It is as much about swinging the spotlight back on retirement age issues for judges and filling vacancies, both long recommended to reduce the pendency of cases. For the uninitiated, SC judges retire at the age of 65, while HC judges retire at the age of 62. As can be seen, there is simply no logic in having the country’s two highest courts retire judges at different ages. As previously stated, over 68,000 cases are pending in the Supreme Court, and over 59 lakh cases are pending in the 25 High Courts. Indeed, flawed investigations, shoddy prosecution, and bad lower court rulings all contribute to the backlog in HCs and appeals in the SC. Quality is important, but vacancies exacerbate the problem. Until six months ago, HCs had 778 judges, despite a sanctioned strength of 1,108.
PC: Melissa Klein
- Furthermore, the Justice Department told a House panel in December that raising the retirement age for judges could have a cascading effect, with government officers demanding it, that the move risked extending the service years of non-performing judges, and that there would be a shortage of judges for tribunals. This is unquestionably making too much of too little. The US Supreme Court, for example, appoints judges for life. Filling vacancies is also a time-consuming and difficult process. Of course, no retired judge ever retires, and this judge, like most others before her, will continue to work. As a result, would it not benefit litigants if they remained court judges for a few more years? The authorities should take this seriously.
