Pendency of court cases in India

Last updated

Pendency of court cases in India is the delay in the disposal of cases (lawsuits), to provide justice to an aggrieved person or organisation, by judicial courts at all levels. In legal contexts, pendency is the state of a case that is pending i.e. has been opened but not concluded.

Contents

The judiciary in India works in hierarchy at three levels - federal or supreme court, state or high courts, and district courts. [1] The court cases is categorised into two types - civil and criminal. In 2024, the total number of pending cases of all types and at all levels rose above 51 million or 5.1 crores, including over 180,000 court cases pending for more than 30 years in district and high courts. [2] [3] [4] 4.5 crore out of 5.1 crore cases, i.e more than 87% cases are pending in district courts as of 2024. [2] Government itself is the biggest litigant having 50% of the pending cases being sponsored by the state. [5] [6] Land and property disputes account for the largest set of pending cases. About 66% of all civil cases in India are related to land and property disputes; and 25% of all cases decided by the Supreme Court involve land disputes. [7]

India has one of the largest number of pending court cases in the world. [8] Many judges and government officials have said that the pendency of cases is the biggest challenge before Indian judiciary. [9] According to a 2018 Niti Aayog strategy paper, at the then-prevailing rate of disposal of cases in the courts, it would take more than 324 years to clear the backlog. [10] At that time in 2018, the pending cases stood at 29 million. With the cases taking time in courts, it leads to delays in the delivery of justice for both victim and accused. In April 2022, a court in Bihar state acquitted a man of murder for lack of evidence after he spent 28 years in jail. [11]

Pendency of cases cost India several percentage points of GDP. [12] Rule of Law Index 2023, a country ranking published by the World Justice Project, ranked India at 111 out of 142 countries in the civil justice, and 93 out of 142 countries in the criminal justice. [13] U.S News & World Report ranked India at 60 out of 87 countries with "Well-developed legal frameworks". [14]

Causes of pendency

Too few judges and non-judicial staff

In 2022, the sanctioned number of judges in India was 21.03 judges per million population. [15] The absolute sanctioned number of judges was 34 in Supreme Court, 1108 in high courts, and 24,631 in district courts. [16] The law commission of India and Justice V S Malimath Committee had recommended in the past to raise the number of judges to 50 judges per million population, or 20,000 population per judge. [17] [18]

The sanctioned number of judges of the Supreme Court of India can be increased by the Parliament passing a law. [19] [20] The sanctioned number of judges of a High Court can be increased by the High Court making a recommendation and after it has been approved by the respective state government, its governor, the Chief Justice of India and the union government. [21] [22]

Vacant judicial positions

Despite the sanctioned number of judges, courts in India have often not worked at full capacity due to vacant positions. In 2022, there were 14.4 judges per million population in India. [18] It has changed marginally from 13.2 in 2016. [23] In comparison, there are 210 judges per million people in Europe and 150 in the United States. [18] Non-judicial staff positions also remain vacant with some states having vacancy rates up to 25% in 2018–19. [24]

Vacancies in courts keep on arising periodically due to retirement, resignation, demise, or elevation of judges. [25] The appointment of judges is a long process. Supreme Court judges are recommended for appointment by the Supreme Court collegium, consisting of the Chief Justice of India and the four remaining senior-most judges of the Supreme court. [26] [19] The names have to be approved by the union government before being appointed by the President. [26]

The high court judges are recommended for appointment by the High Court collegium consisting of the Chief Justice of the High Court, and two remaining senior-most judges of the high court. [27] [28] The names have to be approved by the state government, the governor, the Chief Justice of India, and the union government before being appointed by the President. [27]

The union government and the state government are binding to abide by the suggestion of the Chief Justice of India, the Chief Justice of the High court and their collegium in the appointment of the judges. [27] [19] However, the rule is seldom followed in time and the union government would delay the appointment or return the names for appointment. As per rule, the union government must approve the appointments in 3–4 weeks if the collegium reiterates the names. [29] [30]

The lack of coordination and cooperation is a major cause for the vacancy in the higher judiciary. [31] In some cases, the appointment of judges has been delayed for 4 years due to the names pending with the union government for approval. [32]

The district or lower court judge appointments in a state are made by the respective high court, the governor, and the State Public Service Commission. [33] The exams are conducted for the appointment of the district judges and the civil judges. The examination for the civil judges appointment is conducted by the State Public Service Commission in 10 states only; while all other examination for the judge's appointment in a state jurisdiction is conducted by the High Court themselves. The examination and appointment process are not efficient. In 2018, Supreme Court noted that there was a mismatch in the number of posts vacant in the lower courts and the recruitment underway. [33] In 2022, Bihar Public Service Commission took 30 months just to complete the examination. [34] The union government has proposed setting up AIJS (All India Judicial Service) to tackle vacancies in the lower judiciary by centralising the recruitment process. [35]

Lower judiciary suffers also from not attracting and retaining talented judges, and lack of career progression. Many judges have been quitting the judiciary to go into private practice or join top private law firms, as it offers a lot more in terms of remuneration. [36] Many states have been criticised for the pay offered to lower court judges. Recommendations of the Judicial Pay Commission and the Supreme Court orders to increase the judges salary are not implemented by the states. [37] In Delhi Judiciary exam 2019, 66 percent seats could not be filled as candidates were simply unable to score even the cut off marks. [36] In Jammu and Kashmir judiciary exam 2019, not one candidate passed the district judge exam for the fourth consecutive time. [33] In Tamil Nadu judiciary exam 2019, of around 3,500 lawyers appearing for the district judge examination, none passed.

Inadequate funding

Except the Supreme Court which is funded by the central government, all the expenses of the High Court and the District Courts in a state are funded by the respective state government. As of 2018, 92% of all expenditure on the judiciary was borne by the states. [38] This includes salary of judges, non-judicial staff and all operation costs. In 2019, India spent 0.08% of its GDP on the judiciary. [39] All states and union territories allocated less than 1% of its annual budget on the judiciary, except Delhi with 1.9%. [39] There is no guideline for the state expenditure on the judiciary to ensure higher efficiency of the judiciary. [39]

In comparison, United States spends 2% of its annual budget on judiciary. [40]

Lack of infrastructure

District or lower courts are prone to lack of infrastructure. In 2022, there were only 20,143 court halls and 17,800 residential units for judicial officers available to use against the sanctioned strength of 24,631 lower court judges. [41] Only 40% of the lower court buildings have fully functional toilets with some having no provisions for regular cleaning. Lower courts also suffer from the lack of digital infrastructure, video conferencing rooms, and video connectivity to jails and officers. [42] Development of the infrastructure facilities for judiciary rests with the State Governments. [43] In 2021, Chief Justice N V Ramana had proposed to set up NJIAI (National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India) to perform administrative work of the judiciary including infrastructure development. [41] In comparison, there are similar body within Judiciary in other countries, for example, Administrative Office of the United States Courts in US. [44]

Court cases proceed as per rules described in CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) and CPC (Code of Civil Procedure). CrPC and CPC have been criticised for being archaic. Though amendments were made to CPC in 1999 and 2002, which fixed 30-90 days time limit for different rules in the CPC, and allowed maximum three adjournments. However, Supreme Court of India struck down these amendments in 2005, citing their inherent powers. [45] Adjournments and non-compliance of rules have been used as tools to delay the proceedings. [46] Lawyers unrestrictedly argue with unrelated oral arguments and submit impractical, long written pleadings to waste time and delay the proceedings. [47]

In contrast, while hearing a case in October 2022, Supreme Court of India concluded the hearing in only 8 days after it set the time limits for arguments, and allowed no repetitions. [47] In 2023, Supreme Court of India while expressing concern, again recommended the time limits in CPC to avoid delay in the proceedings. [48]

In CrPC, one rule does not allow criminal cases to proceed if either an accused or a witness is not present before the court. [49] [50] [51] This rule alone accounts for the delay in over 60% of all pending criminal cases, as per NJDG in November 2022. [2]

Corruption and apathy of officials helps in the aiding and abetting abuse of the legal procedure. [52] Judges have been investigated and dismissed for involvement in corruption. [53] [54] [55] [56] Investigation officials have been caught tampering with evidence. [57] An influential politician was acquitted of the assault charges despite the available video evidence. [58] Prison rules have been changed to provide bail to selective political persons. [59] [60]

Singapore, which derived its civil procedure code from the English Law similar to India, used to have delays of upto 10 years in the disposal of civil cases in the 1990's. These delays were largely due to the abuse of civil procedure by the contesting parties. However, after the judicial reforms, the delays became negligible and Singapore now ranks among the top countries with civil and criminal justice system. [61]

Parliament of India has passed three new laws in 2024, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Bharatiya Sakshya Act, 2023, and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita which replaced the CrPC, Indian Evidence Act, and Indian Penal Code respectively. The union government claims that the new laws will provide justice in criminal cases within 3 years. [62]

Ineffective executive and legislative

The disputes and complaints which arise are not resolved by the executive government to the satisfaction of the aggrieved individual and in a fair manner. Laws passed by the legislative may have deficiencies and loopholes. The ineffectiveness of the legislative and the executive administration has led to the docket explosion of cases in the courts. Judges have criticised that the executive and the legislative are not using their full potential which is leading to bad governance and hence putting the burden on the courts. [63] [64]

Statistics by state

Courthall shortfall is calculated as lack of courthalls as percentage of the total sanctioned strength of the judges. [24] A negative percentage means courthalls are in excess. Case clearance rate (CCR) is cases disposed in a year as a percentage of new cases filed in the same year. [24] CCR of less than 100 means case pendency will increase, CCR equal to 100 means case pendency will remain same, CCR of more than 100 means case pendency will decrease. NA: Not Available. (Source: India Justice Report, 2022). [65]

Majority of court cases disposed each year includes magisterial cases (crimes for which prison is 3 years or less), and miscellaneous criminal and bail applications. [2]

State/UTAverage High Court Case Pendency (in Years) (2022)Average Lower Court Case Pendency (in Years) (2020)Budget per capita on judiciary (Rs.) (2020–21) [65] Population per High Court Judge (2022) [65] Population per Lower Court Judge (2022) [65] Courthall shortfall (%) (2022) [65] Case clearance rate of High Court (2022) [65] Case clearance rate of Lower Court (2022) [65]
India 5.473.181461,765,76071,22414.79589
Andaman and Nicobar Islands (UT)9.89NA3371,833,44430,923NA12176
Andhra Pradesh 7.482.201451,765,733109,673- 4.07390
Arunachal Pradesh 3.61NA1991,681,91744,22936.690NA
Assam 3.612.60991,681,91782,27413.49072
Bihar 4.965.66833,674,08892,25920.211393
Chandigarh (UT)6.751.30517933,33340,633- 3.310376
Chhattisgarh 4.082.00992,131,14367,9642.77789
Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu (UT)NANA501,941,636195,000- 14.37297
Delhi (UT)NA2.40581465,88930,69532.58871
Goa NA2.624981,941,63639,175- 6.072113
Gujarat 4.904.401392,523,14360,2801.192117
Haryana 6.751.70270933,33363,36727.710382
Himachal Pradesh 3.102.20278743,10045,87013.78095
Jammu and Kashmir (UT)5.715.40190920,26757,22538.212774
Jharkhand 6.603.801151,855,66766,8424.610196
Karnataka 5.232.981931,372,81663,16214.38295
Kerala 6.502.70233964,89274,5465.8156113
Ladakh (UT)5.71NA313920,26733,22247.112781
Lakshadweep (UT)6.50NA302964,89234,0000.0156NA
Madhya Pradesh NA2.901292,759,61355,58724.08491
Maharashtra NA4.101721,941,63664,645- 7.37292
Manipur 3.382.501501,064,66776,04833.999103
Meghalaya 2.093.701921,106,00065,05946.5128103
Mizoram 3.612.502981,681,91729,92735.490111
Nagaland 3.613.501871,681,91792,20811.89063
Odisha 6.055.651182,007,36456,98316.913190
Puducherry (UT)6.38NA1521,448,870146,182- 38.5107114
Punjab 6.751.50251933,33350,89214.9103100
Rajasthan 5.463.401473,082,80863,51315.96596
Sikkim 1.850.90635227,66732,52428.611197
Tamil Nadu 6.383.001651,448,87071,3519.310798
Telangana 6.852.501571,148,69792,231- 3.110395
Tripura 0.992.572381,369,66737,69732.8107104
Uttar Pradesh 11.346.201042,332,97093,02125.49672
Uttarakhand 3.582.801931,645,42942,50221.18186
West Bengal 9.895.80751,833,444107,41217.612180

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of India</span> Highest court of jurisdiction in India

The Supreme Court of India is the supreme judicial authority and the highest court of the Republic of India. It is the final court of appeal for all civil and criminal cases in India. It also has the power of judicial review. The Supreme Court, which consists of the Chief Justice of India and a maximum of fellow 33 judges, has extensive powers in the form of original, appellate and advisory jurisdictions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Human Rights Commission of India</span> Indian government agency in charge of protecting human rights

The National Human Rights Commission of India is a statutory body constituted on 12 October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Ordinance of 28 September 1993. It was given a statutory basis by the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA). The NHRC is responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights, which is defined by the act as "rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chief Justice of India</span> Presiding judge of the Supreme Court of India

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) (ISO: Bhārata kē Mukhya Nyāyādhīśa) is the chief judge of the Supreme Court of India and the highest-ranking officer of the Indian judiciary. The Constitution of India grants power to the President of India to appoint, as recommended by the outgoing chief justice in consultation with other judges, (as envisaged in Article 124 (2) of the Constitution) the next Chief Justice, who will serve until they reach the age of 65 or are removed by the constitutional process of impeachment.

The high courts of India are the highest courts of appellate jurisdiction in each state and union territory of India. However, a high court exercises its original civil and criminal jurisdiction only if the subordinate courts are not authorized by law to try such matters for lack of peculiar or territorial jurisdiction. High courts may also enjoy original jurisdiction in certain matters, if so designated, especially by the constitution, a state law or union law.

The district courts of India are the district courts of the state governments in India for every district or for one or more districts together taking into account of the number of cases, population distribution in the district. They administer justice in India at a district level.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of India</span> National court system

The judiciary of India is the system of courts that interpret and apply the law in the Republic of India. The Constitution of India provides concept for a single and unified judiciary in India. India uses a mixed legal system based majorly on the common law system with civil laws applicable in certain territories in combination with certain religion specific personal laws.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">A. N. Ray</span> 14th Chief Justice of India

Ajit Nath Ray was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India from 25 April 1973 till his retirement on 28 January 1977.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Altamas Kabir</span> 39th Chief Justice of India

Altamas Kabir was an Indian lawyer and judge who served as the 39th Chief Justice of India.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ranjan Gogoi</span> 46th Chief Justice of India, Member of Rajya Sabha

Ranjan Gogoi is an Indian former advocate and judge who served as the 46th Chief Justice of India from 2018 to 2019, having previously served as a Judge of the Supreme Court of India from 2012 to 2018. He is currently a Member of the Rajya Sabha, having been nominated by President Ram Nath Kovind on 16 March 2020. Gogoi served as a judge in the Gauhati High Court from 2001 to 2010, and then was transferred as a judge to the Punjab and Haryana High Court from 2010 to 2011 where he later was the Chief Justice from 2011 to 2012. He is also a member of the Committee on External Affairs in the Rajya Sabha.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">K. M. Joseph</span> Indian judge (born 1958)

Kuttiyil Mathew Joseph is a former judge of the Supreme Court of India; he retired on 16 June 2023. He is former chief justice of the Uttarakhand High Court. Before his appointment as chief justice of the High Court of Uttarakhand on 31 July 2014, he had served as a judge of the Kerala High Court for more than nine years.

The Indian Judicial Collegium system, where existing judges appoint judges to the nation's constitutional courts, has its genesis in, and continued basis resting on, three of its own judgments made by Supreme Court judges, which are collectively known as the Three Judges Cases. The collegium system has often been alleged to have caste bias due to the lack of representation of marginalised communities, i.e., OBCs, SCs and STs, in the Supreme Court and high courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sharad Bobde</span> 47th Chief Justice of India

Sharad Arvind Bobde is an Indian judge who served as the 47th Chief Justice of India from 18 November 2019 to 23 April 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">N. V. Ramana</span> 48th Chief Justice of India

Nuthalapati Venkata Ramana is a former Indian judge and journalist who served as the 48th Chief Justice of India.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uday Umesh Lalit</span> 49th Chief Justice of India

Uday Umesh Lalit is an Indian lawyer and former Supreme Court Judge, who served as the 49th Chief Justice of India. Previously, he has served as a judge of Supreme Court of India. Prior to his elevation as a judge of the supreme court, he practised as a senior advocate at the Supreme Court. Justice Lalit is one of the eleven senior counsels who have been directly elevated to the Supreme Court. He is currently ‘Distinguished Visiting Professor’ at Ashank Desai Centre for Policy Studies, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay and Distinguished Visiting Professor at West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences.

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was a proposed body which would have been responsible for the recruitment, appointment and transfer of judicial officers, legal officers and legal employees under the government of India and in all state governments of India. The commission was established by amending the Constitution of India through the 99th constitution amendment with the Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 or 99th Constitutional Amendment Act-2014 passed by the Lok Sabha on 13 August 2014 and by the Rajya Sabha on 14 August 2014. The NJAC would have replaced the collegium system for the appointment of judges as invoked by the Supreme Court via judicial fiat by a new system. Along with the Constitution Amendment Act, the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, was also passed by the Parliament of India to regulate the functions of the National Judicial Appointments Commission. The NJAC Bill and the Constitutional Amendment Bill, was ratified by 16 of the state legislatures in India, and subsequently assented by the President of India Pranab Mukherjee on 31 December 2014. The NJAC Act and the Constitutional Amendment Act came into force from 13 April 2015.

Vijaya Kamlesh Tahilramani is a former Indian judge and prosecutor, who last served as the chief justice of the Madras High Court. Previously, as a judge of the Bombay High Court, she notably upheld the conviction of several persons for the rape of a pregnant Muslim woman during the 2002 Gujarat riots, chastising investigative authorities for their inaction in the matter, and also refused parole for those convicted in the 1993 Bombay bombings. She retired in 2019, after refusing to accept a controversial transfer from the Madras High Court to the Meghalaya High Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sanjiv Khanna</span> Chief Justice of India since 2024

Sanjiv Khanna (born 14 May 1960) is an Indian jurist currently serving as the 51st Chief Justice of India since 11 November 2024. He is the ex officio Patron-in-Chief of the National Legal Services Authority and the de facto Chancellor of the National Law School of India University. He has also served as a judge at the Delhi High Court.

Pushpa Virendra Ganediwala is an Indian lawyer. She was previously an additional judge of the Bombay High Court, but resigned in 2022, after the Supreme Court of India took the unusual step of refusing to confirm her appointment to the High Court as permanent, after she delivered several controversial judgments concerning cases of sexual assaults against women and children.

The Ninety-ninth Amendment of the Constitution of India, officially known as The Constitution Act, 2014, formed a National Judicial Appointments Commission. 16 State assemblies out of 29 States including Goa, Rajasthan, Tripura, Gujarat and Telangana ratified the Central Legislation, enabling the President of India to give assent to the bill. The amendment was struck down by the Supreme Court on 16 October 2015.

References

  1. ↑ "Department of Justice | India" . Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  2. 1 2 3 4 "Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid". njdg.ecourts.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  3. ↑ "Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid for High Courts of India". njdg.ecourts.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  4. ↑ "Justice delayed: Over 1 lakh cases in lower courts more than 30 years old". India Today. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  5. ↑ "Half of judiciary's problems due to state-sponsored litigation: NV Ramana". www.business-standard.com. Press Trust of India. 2022-09-24. Retrieved 2023-01-20.
  6. ↑ "CJI terms govts as biggest litigants, says docket explosion due to executive, legislature". The Economic Times. Retrieved 2023-01-20.
  7. ↑ "Understanding Land Conflict in India and Suggestions for Reform". CPR. 2021-12-21. Retrieved 2023-11-24.
  8. ↑ "India has world's largest backlog of court cases: PM". NDTV.com. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  9. ↑ "Pendency of court cases 'huge challenge': Chief Justice N. V. Ramana". The Hindu. 2022-08-26. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  10. ↑ "44 million pending court cases: How did we get here?". Moneycontrol. 5 December 2021. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  11. ↑ "India's huge backlog of court cases delays justice: Experts". www.aa.com.tr. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  12. ↑ Boehm, Johannes; Oberfield, Ezra (November 2020). "Misallocation in the Market for Inputs: Enforcement and the Organization of Production". The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 135 (4): 2007–2058. doi:10.1093/qje/qjaa020.
  13. ↑ "WJP Rule of Law Index". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2023-11-24.
  14. ↑ "These Countries Have the Most Well-Developed Legal Frameworks".
  15. ↑ "India has about 21 judges per million people". The Economic Times. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  16. ↑ Poddar, Umang (6 August 2022). "India's lower courts are sitting on 4 crore cases. Filling judicial vacancies must be a priority". Scroll.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  17. ↑ SMSala. "Pendency in Indian Judiciary". Rising Kashmir. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  18. 1 2 3 Gera, Ishaan. "Only 14.4 Judges Per Million Population". Rediff. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  19. 1 2 3 "Article 124 of Indian Constitution".
  20. ↑ "Supreme Court Judges". pib.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-13.
  21. ↑ Bench, Bar & (9 June 2021). "Central government approves increase in sanctioned Bench strength of Telangana High Court by 75 percent after intervention by CJI NV Ramana". Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news. Retrieved 2022-11-13.
  22. ↑ "Telangana High Court strength increased from 24 to 42 judges". The News Minute. 2021-06-10. Retrieved 2022-11-13.
  23. ↑ "India: number of judges 2020". Statista. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  24. 1 2 3 "India Justice Report 2020" (PDF).
  25. ↑ "Understanding vacancies in the Indian judiciary". PRS Legislative Research. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  26. 1 2 "Memorandum of procedure of appointment of Supreme Court Judges | Department of Justice | India" . Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  27. 1 2 3 "Memorandum of procedure of appointment of High Court Judges | Department of Justice | India" . Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  28. ↑ "Article 217 of Indian Constitution".
  29. ↑ "'Not Acceptable': SC Slams Union Govt Over Delay in Clearing Collegium-Approved Judges". The Wire. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  30. ↑ "SC Collegium Sent 106 Names for Judges, 9 for CJs, but Centre Cleared Only 8 Names: CJI". The Wire. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  31. ↑ "Faceoff: Centre objected but Supreme Court Collegium firm on 12 names for HCs". The Indian Express. 2021-09-05. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  32. ↑ "After 4 years of delay, Centre to clear appointment of Sadiq Wasim Nagral as judge of J&K High Court". The Indian Express. 2022-05-31. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
  33. 1 2 3 Poddar, Umang (6 August 2022). "India's lower courts are sitting on 4 crore cases. Filling judicial vacancies must be a priority". Scroll.in. Retrieved 2022-12-20.
  34. ↑ "Bihar Public Service Commission Result" (PDF).
  35. ↑ "Explained: Lower judiciary and centralised recruitment debate". The Indian Express. 2021-11-05. Retrieved 2022-12-20.
  36. 1 2 "Here is why there will be a lot of lower judiciary vacancies in the coming years Lawsikho Blog". lawsikho.com. Retrieved 2022-12-20.
  37. ↑ "Judicial officers demand implementation of revised pay scale". The Hindu. 2022-11-25. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 2023-01-12.
  38. ↑ Suresh, Nileena (2022-02-22). "Explained: How The Union Budget Funds India's Justice System". www.indiaspend.com. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  39. 1 2 3 "India Justice Report 2019" (PDF).
  40. ↑ "Criminal Justice Expenditures: Police, Corrections, and Courts". Urban Institute. Retrieved 2022-11-24.
  41. 1 2 Sahoo, Niranjan (2022-07-20). "Indian judiciary is crying for basic infrastructure. Here's what Centre & states need to do". ThePrint. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  42. ↑ Singh, Soibam Rocky (2021-12-06). "Judicial infrastructure, a neglected case". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  43. ↑ "National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India". www.pib.gov.in. Retrieved 2022-11-06.
  44. ↑ "Agency". www.usgovernmentmanual.gov. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  45. ↑ Ranjan, Brajesh. "What causes judicial delay? Judgments diluting timeframes in Code of Civil Procedure worsen the problem of adjournments". The Times of India. ISSN   0971-8257 . Retrieved 2023-12-10.
  46. ↑ "Frequent adjournments leading to pendency of cases at consumer courts: Experts". www.daijiworld.com. Retrieved 2022-11-07.
  47. 1 2 "Buried in Words: Supreme Court Struggles with Long Submissions". Supreme Court Observer. Retrieved 2022-11-07.
  48. ↑ "Pendency of cases: Supreme Court issues directions for speedy disposal of civil cases". India Today. Retrieved 2023-12-10.
  49. ↑ Bhaumik, Aaratrika (2022-05-06). "'Archaic Law': Calcutta HC Recommends Amendments To CrPC To Allow Trial In Absentia Of An Absconding Accused To Secure Rights Of Sexual Abuse Victims". www.livelaw.in. Retrieved 2022-11-07.
  50. ↑ "'Judges say HC stay, absconding accused reasons behind cases pending for decades'". The Times of India. March 25, 2019. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  51. ↑ Varghese, Hannah M. (2022-01-14). "Must Prove Accused Is Absconding With No Immediate Prospect For Arrest To Record Witness Deposition U/S 299 CrPC: Kerala High Court". www.livelaw.in. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  52. ↑ "Official apathy delays the case that may put an end to the pendency of criminal appeals in India – The Leaflet". theleaflet.in. 2022-05-24. Retrieved 2022-11-09.
  53. ↑ "CBI Files Corruption Case Against Former High Court Judge SN Shukla". NDTV.com. Retrieved 2024-10-09.
  54. ↑ "Gujarat high court upholds judge's dismissal, says 'no mercy for corrupt officers'". The Times of India. 2024-02-10. ISSN   0971-8257 . Retrieved 2024-10-09.
  55. ↑ "'Post comes with great responsibility': Madhya Pradesh High Court upholds dismissal of corruption-accused judge". The Indian Express. 2024-08-06. Retrieved 2024-10-09.
  56. ↑ "Ludhiana Civil Judge Suspended for Corruption and Indiscipline After Vigilance Probe - Law Trend". 2024-04-06. Retrieved 2024-10-09.
  57. ↑ "Pune crash: Teen's blood sample was thrown in dustbin, 2 doctors arrested". India Today. 2024-05-27. Retrieved 2024-10-09.
  58. ↑ "BJP Leader Acquitted In Case Of Assault On Madhya Pradesh Official With Bat". NDTV.com. Retrieved 2024-10-09.
  59. ↑ "Bihar government tweaks jail rules, sets free murder convict-politician Anand Mohan". The Indian Express. 2023-04-25. Retrieved 2024-10-09.
  60. ↑ "Dera chief seeks parole again; poll panel questions reasoning".
  61. ↑ "JUDICIAL REFORM: RESHAPING THE CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN SINGAPORE" (PDF).
  62. ↑ "New laws replacing IPC, CrPC to come into effect on July 1". The Times of India. 2024-02-25. ISSN   0971-8257 . Retrieved 2024-04-07.
  63. ↑ "By not doing job, executive and legislature are burdening courts: CJI Ramana". The Indian Express. 2022-04-30. Retrieved 2024-01-18.
  64. ↑ "Govts biggest litigants, docket explosion due to exec, legislature: CJI".
  65. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "India Justice Report 2022" (PDF).
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.