Context:
With over 90,000 cases pending in the Supreme Court of India, Chief Justice of India–designate Justice Surya Kant has identified judicial backlog as the most significant institutional hurdle. He has outlined a multi-pronged strategy focusing on Constitution Benches, judicial discipline, and mediation to address the issue systematically.
Key Highlights:
Focus on Reducing Pendency
-
Supreme Court pendency has crossed 90,000 cases, creating systemic delays.
-
Pendency at the apex court has a cascading effect, stalling related cases in High Courts and subordinate courts.
Constitution Benches for Legal Clarity
-
Justice Surya Kant plans to:
-
Prioritise long-pending cases involving substantial questions of constitutional law.
-
Constitute seven-judge and nine-judge Constitution Benches.
-
-
Objective:
-
Deliver authoritative declarations of law.
-
Remove legal ambiguities that block adjudication in lower courts.
-
Identification of Bottleneck Cases
-
Emphasis on identifying crucial cases that:
-
Prevent lower courts from deciding connected matters.
-
-
Information sought from High Courts regarding long-pending cases to ensure a holistic approach.
Encouraging Judicial Discipline
-
Justice Kant suggested that litigants should:
-
Approach High Courts first instead of directly filing petitions in the Supreme Court.
-
-
This aims to:
-
Reduce misuse of Article 32
-
Restore the Supreme Court’s role as a constitutional court, not a routine appellate forum.
-
Promotion of Mediation
-
Strong emphasis on mediation and alternative dispute resolution (ADR).
-
Mediation seen as:
-
Faster
-
Cost-effective
-
Less adversarial
-
-
Intended to reduce litigation load and enhance access to justice.
Relevant Prelims Points:
-
Pendency:
-
Refers to cases that are filed but not yet disposed of.
-
-
Constitution Bench:
-
Bench of at least five judges under Article 145(3).
-
Deals with substantial questions of constitutional interpretation.
-
-
Mediation:
-
Voluntary dispute resolution process involving a neutral third party.
-
Causes of Judicial Pendency:
-
Increasing litigation
-
Vacancies in judiciary
-
Frequent adjournments
-
Overburdening of the Supreme Court
Benefits of Proposed Measures:
-
Faster disposal of cases
-
Legal certainty through authoritative rulings
-
Reduced burden on lower courts
Challenges:
-
Limited judicial manpower
-
Resistance to behavioural change among litigants
-
Need for institutional coordination
Impact:
-
Strengthens judicial efficiency
-
Improves public confidence in the justice system
Relevant Mains Points:
-
Facts & Provisions:
-
Article 32, Article 145(3)
-
Role of Supreme Court as a constitutional court
-
-
Keywords & Static Linkages:
-
Judicial backlog, access to justice
-
ADR mechanisms, judicial reforms
-
-
Governance Perspective:
-
Efficient judiciary as a pillar of rule of law
-
-
Way Forward:
-
Expand court-annexed mediation
-
Fill judicial vacancies promptly
-
Use technology and case management systems
-
Encourage judicial restraint in admitting cases
-
UPSC Relevance (GS-wise):
-
GS 2: Judiciary, Governance, Constitutional Bodies
-
Prelims: Constitution Benches, Mediation, Pendency