Pay attention to the courts

Any justice delivery system has an obligation to deliver prompt and inexpensive justice to its consumers, without in any manner compromising on the quality of justice or the elements of fairness, equality and impartiality. However, for justice to be meaningful, it must be delivered within a time-frame that makes sense during the lifetime of a litigant. Denial of ‘timely justice’ amounts to denial of ‘justice’ itself. The two are integral to each other. Timely disposal of cases is essential for maintaining the rule of law and providing access to justice, which is a guaranteed fundamental right. The official figures of pending cases clearly show that the challenge to the Indian State is that of timely justice. This is so because if timely justice is not made available by the State to its citizens, human and economic development is retarded.

Disputed contracts, properties and securities lie frozen in the courts for years, mocking at the constitutional right to property and the human right to dignity. Under trial prisoners burden the State finances, with the avoidable costs of public money as well as seething discontent over political, police and prison governance. The angst over proving criminal or contractual innocence, unable to wait for a judicial decision, held up because of the lack of adequate number of judges and judicial infrastructure. The rule of law, another judicially declared component of the basic structure, stands violated. The credibility of constitutional governance and a constitutional State is getting gradually eroded.

The Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who immediately after taking over as the Chief Justice of India, reprimanded the states and the high courts for their inefficiency in filling the vacancies in the subordinate judiciary, once again admonished states government for its inability to give a definite time line for creating the necessary courtrooms and residential space for judges to be appointed in subordinate courts. 

The National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms outlined that adequacy of judicial infrastructure is a prerequisite for reduction of pendency and backlog of cases in courts. Department of Justice in 2015 estimated total 16,513 courtrooms for a working strength of 16,070 judicial officers. The Centre for Research and Planning, Supreme Court of India to which I was part documented more deteriorating figures: a sanctioned strength of 20,558 judicial officers now only had 15,540 courtrooms and a deficit of 8,538 residential units. Therefore, any attempt to unravel the problem of judicial vacancies is required to go hand-in-hand with enhancement of judicial infrastructure which includes courtroom, support staff, residential space and other technological requirements.

Miniscule budgetary allocation for the judicial governance has been a serious concern. Time and again, the Chief Justices have raised this issue that ungenerous budgetary allocation is utterly insufficient to improve infrastructure, which is imperative to bring down the massive pendency in Indian courts. The primary responsibility of infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary though lies with the state governments, but central government also releases additional funds under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for creating judicial infrastructure. Till 2011, the Centre and states contributed equally but since 2011-12 the fund-sharing arrangement was revised with the Centre contributing 75 per cent of the funds, however, subject to budgetary allocation.

The Union Budget for 2016-17 assigned Rs 900 crore for ‘administration of justice’, including setting up of e-courts and capacity building of subordinate judiciary. Between 2011 and March 2016, the Centre released Rs 3,694 crore to the state governments and UTs for construction of court buildings and residential accommodation of judicial officers. The Union Budget 2018-19 allocated of Rs 2,167.24 crore for the judiciary struggling to cope with huge pendency of cases. This allocation is up by Rs 145.43 crore in comparison to allocation of Rs 2,021.81 crore for year 2017-18, nevertheless, it is a miniscule part of the Rs 24 lakh crore budget presented by the Finance Minister. 

The government’s treatment of judiciary as a non-productive organ of state is the biggest anxiety. With less than one per cent of the Union Budget spent, the judicial system will undeniably be under strain on account of huge backlog of cases. The Department of Justice has proposed an infrastructural overhaul with a budget of Rs 9,749 crores. This would include setting up of additional courts in districts with high pendency, fast track courts to try cases of heinous crimes, more family courts, re-designing existing court complexes, digitization of case records and training and capacity building. The Union Government passed Gram Nyayalaya Act (2008) with an object to provide doorstep justice, but most states have not set up Gram Nyayalayas, especially the northeastern states. In order to reach out to marginalised groups and reduce the pendency of cases, state governments have to prioritise the setting up of Gram Nyayalayas with adequate infrastructure. Further, creation and implementation of ICT infrastructure in Indian Judiciary has to be done on priority basis. Expectations are more from Chief Justice of India, who claimed that he has a plan to deal with the pendency with this precise remark: “Time is short. We are making efforts for best results in the shortest time.”

Writer is associate professor of law, NLU