A Project On

PENDING COURT CASES

SOCIOLOGY

SUBMITTED TO: - Mr. Sangeet Kumar FACULTY: - Sociology

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Made By: Nidhi Navneet 1st year (1st semester) ROLL No.570 B.A.LL.B. (Hons)

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am feeling highly elated to work on the topic Pending Court cases under the guidance of my SOCIOLOGY teacher. I am very grateful to him for his exemplary guidance. I would like to enlighten my readers

regarding this topic and I hope I have tried my best to pave the way for bringing more luminosity to this topic.

I also want to thank all of my friends, without whose cooperation this project was not possible. Apart from all these, I want to give special thanks to the librarian of my university who made every relevant materials regarding to my topic available to me at the time of my busy research work and gave me assistance. And at last I am very much obliged to the God who provided me the potential for the rigorous research work.

At finally yet importantly I would like to thank my parents for the financial support.

-----------Thanking you Nidhi Navneet C.N.L.U.

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Method:
The researcher has used both the Doctrinal and Empirical method of research for this topic, as this topic is related with both the legal provisions and the society. For this along with the written material available in library and on net, there is a need of field work to be done which is going to be incorporated by the researcher.

Aims & Objectives

The aim & objective of this research work is mainly to find out the reasons behind the increasing number of pending cases in Indian judiciary and the measures taken by the government to reduce this huge number. Also, the objective of this research is to know what the general people and the legal professionals think about the increasing pilation of cases and the burden on the judicial system.

Sources of Data
The whole project is made with the use of both primary and secondary sources. As the primary source, the field work and peoples views is taken and for the secondary sources, books, journals, newspaper article, material available on net and articles written by eminent jurists is taken.

Method of Writing
The method of writing followed in the course of this research paper is primarily analytical.

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Type of Study
For this topic, the researcher is following the Analytical and Critical type of study, as in this topic the problem is related to the society and a complete analysis of the problem is required and there is a need of solution to that problem.

Hypothesis
What could be the reason behind the pilation of large number of cases in courts with the pending statuses? According to me, as my Hypothesis, maybe the less number of judges, good lawyers, legal facilities, court rooms, subordinate courts etc. can be the main reason behind this. One more reason which I think is that unavailability or less availability of good source of legal education in India. There are a few colleges and universities present which provides quality education of law to the budding lawyers. And rest of them are just a crap on the name of legal institution as they fail to provide education facilities, scopes, quality of professors and thus they are failing even to stand at the par.

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction Bookmark not defined. Indian Judiciary: Organisation and Working Reasons of Pendency Data Related to Pending Cases Important Cases Impact of Pendency of Cases Steps Undertaken Suggested Remedies Field Work Conclusion Bibliography 7 11 14 17 21 23 25 30 32 34 Error!

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

INTRODUCTION
With a second largest population in world, India, needs a huge judiciary system to tackle the emerging cases and conflicts in the society, but it is lacking behind as its not in an appropriate ratio to the cases arising. INDIAN JUDICIARY has met great stigma of malfunctioning as we can undertake a view on the recent reports on PENDING COURT CASES, as there are more than 3.5 lakhs cases pending which is really a result of unproper functioning of Indian judiciary. In the present scenario, with development in each field and sector of society, the demands of the people have also increased. With increasing demands, the conflicts arising among the members of society have also increased. These small conflicts in their adverse forms become suits or cases, and thus, everyday cases are getting filed in the courts comprising all the low level and high level courts. The result of these cases came after a long time or sometimes these cases just remain pending, as the delivery of verdicts is done on a very slow pace whereas filing of cases on a daily basis is done on high pace. The condition is just same as that of computers showing error message because of high input and low output. When number of incoming cases will be high and number of outgoing low, then it will certainly result in backlog which is the case in the present Indian Judicial System and also the main reason of piling of such a large number of cases with Pending status. Some of the cases which remained pended for such a long time that when their result came, it became useless for the petitioner or the plaintiff or the aggrieved party, all because of such volume of Pending cases in courts. Some cases like Harshad Mehtas case, Bhopal Gas Tragedy, Ayodhya dispute etc., remained pended for so long that the world almost forgot about that and the aggrieved party waited for justice. Some cases whose results were not declared 5

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 i.e., discussions on which kept continuing, resulted in low morality of the petitioners. Further illustration on these points will be given in subsequent chapters. Although the judiciary and government is paying heed towards this problem and also have came with certain ideas which could help in clearing the backlog but as those ideas are not getting implemented properly, the problem is still there. Procedures like Alternative Dispute Resolution system, provision of speedy trials, and rule of no further appeal for the cases of lower courts can certainly help in clearing the backlog. These procedures when implemented effectively can at least prevent the further pilation for sure and this will in itself be an achievement for the judiciary. A complete illustration will be given in subsequent chapters.

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Indian Judiciary: Organisation and Working

Organisation
The Judiciary of India is an independent body and is separate from the Executive and Legislative bodies of the Indian Government. The judicial system of India is stratified into various levels. At the apex is the Supreme Court, which is followed by High Courts at the state level, District Courts at the district level and Lok Adalats at the Village and Panchayat Level. The judiciary of India takes care of maintenance of law and order in the country along with solving problems related to civil and criminal offences. The Judges of the Supreme Court are free to exercise their power as and when required. The process of removal of the Supreme Court judges is quite an interesting but lengthy process. An order from the President is mandatory in case of removal of the judges. A two-thirds majority has to be obtained from both the houses for the removal of the judges. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is divided into original jurisdiction, advisory jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction is required when there is a dispute between the Government and the states of India or any one state of India. The Supreme Court can also enforce fundamental Rights according to the Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The appellate jurisdiction is mentioned in Articles 132(1), 133(1) or 134 of the Constitution. The decision of the High Court can be questioned in the Supreme Court of the country. One can appeal to the Supreme Court, if he or she is not satisfied with the decision of the High Court. The Supreme Court has the provision of accepting or rejecting the case at its own discretion. There are also provisions of pardoning criminals and canceling their lifetime imprisonment or death sentence by the Supreme Court. Apart from the original and appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, there is an advisory jurisdiction that needs special mention. There are many

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 cases that are directly referred by the President of India and the Supreme Court has to look into those matters. This provision is mentioned in Article 143 of the Indian Constitution. The High Courts in India There are High Courts in almost all the states of India and the Union Territories. The High Courts work under the Supreme Court in the country. These courts are vested with lots of power. They decide on both civil as well as criminal cases. Most of the cases that are handled by the High Courts of the country are passed on from the district or lower courts. The judges of the High Courts are appointed by the President of India, in consultation with the Chief justice of India and the Governor of the state. The Chief Justice heads each of the High Courts in India. The numbers of judges vary from one court to other depending on the area that the High Court covers and the number of cases that it handles. Each of these courts have original and appellate jurisdiction under them. Summons can also be issued by the High Court. Revenue matters are dealt by original jurisdiction, while an eminent jury handles original criminal cases. Established in the year 1862, the Calcutta High Court is the oldest court in India. Apart from this, there are 18 total High Courts in the country, some of which are Bombay High Court, Delhi High Court, Madras High Court, Patna High Court and Sikkim High Court, etc. The Supreme Court of India The Supreme Court is the highest judicial body in India. The Supreme Court came into power on 28th January 1950; just two days after the Constitution of India came to effect. The Supreme Court is endowed with many duties and responsibilities. The biggest responsibility is that it is the highest court of appeal and is also the protector of the Constitution in the country. The Chief Justice of India and 25 other judges make up the Supreme Court of India. The appointments are done directly by the President of India. There are certain criteria that have to be fulfilled by the advocates to become a judge of the Supreme Court. Being a citizen of India is one of the most 8

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 important criteria. Apart from this, the person has to have an experience of minimum five years as a judge in the High Court or any other two courts one after another. He should also be a prominent jurist as per the President of the country, so that he can take up responsibilities well. The Chief Justice is also consulted at the time of appointment of the judges in the Supreme Court. The Constitution seeks to ensure the independence of Supreme Court Judges in various ways. A Judge of the Supreme Court cannot be removed from office except by an order of the President passed after an address in each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of members present and voting, and presented to the President in the same Session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehavior or incapacity. The proceedings of the Supreme Court are conducted in English only. Supreme Court Rules, 1966 are framed under Article 145 of the Constitution to regulate the practice and procedure of the Supreme Court. Working Procedure There is a long and tedious process followed from the very beginning of filing of either a civil or criminal case. All these process being compulsory in nature attribute in delaying a case. The steps are pointed out here 1. Making of a Plaint by the plaintiff 2. Filing of Suit 3. Summon orders to the defendant 4. Producing a Written Statement 5. Framing of Issues on the defendant 6. Processes related to call Evidence 7. Arguments between the two parties 8. Judgement given by the Judge 9. Provisions of Appeal or Revision 10. Execution of the Judgement After completion of all these processes only, a case is said to be properly adjudicated and an efficient judgement is said to be delivered by the judge.

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Reasons of Pendency of Cases

There are cases where the disposal has taken as many as 20 to 30 years. While the maxim of Justice delayed is Justice denied holds true in all such cases, it is also important and relevant to examine the reasons for the delay. There are various reasons available for the pendency of such large number of cases. From the very upper level i.e. courts to the lower level i.e. the individuals along with the lawyers incorporate in delaying the cases for various reasons. Some of the reasons are: Late appointment of judges administration/ states fails to recruit requisite number of judges within a stipulated time. This result in less number of judges for handling the cases and thus a heavy burden of numbers of cases are put on a single judge. The Writ jurisdiction of the High court and the style of its exercise. The provision of writ jurisdiction forces courts to attend to those cases as early as possible leaving all other cases related to different matters. Thus this causes neglect towards other cases and their litigation process comes to a halt. Face value of certain senior lawyers in whose hands most of the work falls contribute to delay and arrears by their non-availability and unpreparedness. These lawyers at a time take number of cases in their hands and then cant give their hundred percent attentions to any of them. The complete procedural of litigation is cumbersome and takes a lot of time at each and every step further adding in the delays of cases. At times litigants also do not realise their responsibilities. Sometimes, the sole object of their going to court is to obtain a stay order or an injunction to harass the adversary. Sometimes just to take revenge or follow their enmity, litigants file false cases against their rivals and keep prolonging those cases in courts. This also causes increase in pendency.

10

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 The improper ratio of cases getting filed per day and cases on which litigation process is going on also is a reason for increased pendency. The time specified for working of courts is less for completion of any proceeding and thus it occurs in delay in completion of the case. Lax judge who seem to be unable to reach decision after a trial has been held, possibly because the issues and evidences are so complete. The judges then keep giving dates after dates for further proceedings and thus contribute in their pendency. Also, sometimes for personal benefit lawyers keep on asking for more dates so that the case could not come to an end and through his/her hirer they can keep on extracting money. For their continued income, a case is not completed in the stipulated and appropriate time by the lawyers and thus those cases remain pending. Also treatment of cases is a big factor in contribution to pending cases as every type of cases whether it is for some small reason like pick pocketing, stealing and simple hurt or it is for some grave issues like murder or issues of national importance, all have to go through the same procedures and firstly kept on the same footing. This causes pendency of important cases. The illiteracy and ignorance of the common people also attributes to this as these people not aware of their rights of getting speedy judgement, do not raise their voice for that. Also, these people get easily mislead by the lawyers who keep on exploiting them for their personal gain. Also, corruption is one of the major factors of important cases getting delayed as sometimes the judiciary becomes the puppet of persons having any kind of power in society. According to Transparency International, judicial corruption in India is attributable to factors such as "delays in the disposal of cases, shortage of judges and complex procedures, all of which are exacerbated by a preponderance of new laws".

11

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 A study by the National Judicial Academy says the pace at which cases were piling up was much faster than the increase in number of judicial officers. From 1985 to 2003, the study said, there was an 84 percent increase in cases, whereas increase in number of judicial officers was just 40 percent. However, paucity of funds is a hindrance. In the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-12), the allocation for judiciary is just 0.07 percent of the total plan outlay. It was in the context of this appallingly low budgetary allocation that the apex court bench of Justice G.S. Singhvi and Justice A.K. Ganguly once said that "no government (irrespective of its political colour) wants judiciary to be strong". Perhaps it was this lack of political will that came in the way of implementation of the 11th Law Commission report recommending a five-fold increase in the strength of judges at all levels. However it needs to be mentioned that the concept of backlogs doesn't describe the actual reason for some many cases lying in the courts. As could be understood, the largest number of cases that are actually pending in the Indian Courts are that of minor Motor Vehicle Cases, (which evolves out of wrong parking, minor road accidents, not following traffic rules, etc. In these cases, the people involved are generally the drivers, who happen to carry 3-4 driving licences having different addresses. Thus, the actual address is never given to the police officer, due to whom the accused could not be produced before the court for years).

12

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Data Related to Pending Cases

A total of 46,926 cases were pending in the Supreme Court on 31st December, 2007. In the 21 High Courts across the country 37, 00,223 cases were pending as on 30.9.07. Of these 30, 00,118 were civil cases and 7, 00,115 were criminal cases. Also an astounding 26.3 million cases are pending in subordinate courts across the country. Of the pending cases in high courts, 704,214 were criminal and 3.2 million were civil cases. At the same time, there are almost a quarter million under-trials languishing in jails across the country. Of these, some 2,069 have been in jail for more than five years, even as their guilt or innocence is yet to be ascertained. This has been revealed by official figures emerging from the home ministry's department of justice, under a Right to Information Act application placed by a citizen.

High Court wise pendency is as under:

Allahabad - 808226, Andhra Pradesh - 147537, Bombay - 367409, Calcutta - 279318, Chhattisgarh - 74701, Delhi - 76674, Gujarat - 110639, Gauhati - 59339, Himachal Pradesh - 26781, Jammu & Kashmir - 45374, Jharkhand - 49276, Karnataka - 104237, Kerala - 115750, Madhya Pradesh 187677, Madras - 426347, Orissa - 227752, Patna - 102165, Punjab & Haryana - 255696, Rajasthan - 212451, Sikkim - 67 and Uttaranchal - 22807. It has been found that over a quarter of all pending high court cases are at Allahabad. The Allahabad High Court had some 1.09 million pending cases, with over eight out of every 10 cases being civil cases at the end of 2006. Madras High Court and Bombay High Court were the others with a large number of pending cases. Sikkim is the lowest with just pending cases. In Subordinate Courts, Uttar Pradesh again topped the number of pending cases (4.6 million), followed by Maharashtra (4.1 million), Gujarat (3.9 million), West Bengal (1.9 million), Bihar (1.2 million), Karnataka (1.06

13

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 million), Rajasthan (1.05 million), Orissa (1 million), Andhra Pradesh (900,000). In another query, the National Crime Records Bureau that functions under the home ministry told Hari Kumar P. of Kasargod in a Right to Information Act reply that the number of under-trials in India was highest in Maharashtra (15,784) and Madhya Pradesh (15,777). Bihar (with 628 prisoners) topped the number of states with the maximum number of under-trials kept for over five years. Punjab also had 334 under-trials for over five years and Uttar Pradesh had 212. Delhi itself had 344 under-trials languishing in jails for over five years. On the positive side, some states had no under-trials in jail for this long a period without their trials being completed. These states included Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Manipur, Mizoram, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, and Tripura, apart from some smaller states and union territories. The large number of pendency caused by the arrears and backlog existing in courts always point to the dissapointing state of affairs of the Indian Judicial system with 14 judges per million and 1 advocate for 1467 Indians. This information was given by Minister of Law and Justice, Shri H. R. Bhardwaj in written reply to a question in Rajya Sabha. Although this information was of the year 2007, but still its of much importance. As per the latest available information, 57,179 cases were pending in the Supreme Court of India as on June 30, 2011. The number of cases pending in the High Courts were 42,17,903 as on September 30, 2010. In written reply to a question in Rajya Sabha, Salman Khurshid, Minister of Law & Justice informed the House.

14

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

15

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Important Cases
There are many cases as example in the past which shows the inefficiency of Indian judiciary in providing justice to the people on time. Although they had been decided but the decision had came so late that it didnt provided that actual justice to the victims. These are the cases which remained pended for more than 15 years in our courts, though they needed to be solved earlier as they were of National importance. If the important cases of national view face such pendency then we can just think the statuses of cases related to the day to day affairs. They are 1. Ayodhya dispute: The Ayodhya dispute is a political, historical and socio-religious debate in India in which the main issues revolve around access to a site traditionally regarded as the birthplace of the Hindu god Rama, the history and location of the Babri Mosque at the site, and whether a previous Hindu temple was demolished or modified to create the mosque. The Babri Mosque was destroyed by hardline Hindu activists during a political rally which turned into a riot on December 6, 1992. A subsequent land title case was lodged in the Allahabad High Court, the verdict of which was pronounced on September 30, 2010. In the landmark hearing, the three judges of The Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres of Ayodhya land be divided into 3 parts, with 1/3 going to the Ram Lalla represented by the Hindu Maha Sabha for the construction of the Ram temple, 1/3 going to the Islamic Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining 1/3 going to a Hindu religious denomination Nirmohi Akhara. For almost 19 years, the people of ayodhya waited for the result to be declared and witnessed the clash between hindu and muslims. As the case was not decided for a long time, because of its pendency, people of ayodhya faced the turmoil over there. 2. Bhopal Gas Tragedy: The Bhopal disaster also known as Bhopal Gas Tragedy was a gas leak accident in India, considered one of the world's worst industrial catastrophes. It occurred on the night of December 23,

16

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 1984 at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India. A leak of methyl isocyanate gas and other chemicals from the plant resulted in the exposure of hundreds of thousands of people. Estimates vary on the death toll. The official immediate death toll was 2,259 and the government of Madhya Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3,787 deaths related to the gas release. Civil and criminal cases are pending in the United States District Court, Manhattan and the District Court of Bhopal, India, involving UCC, UCIL employees, and Warren Anderson, UCC CEO at the time of the disaster. In June 2010, seven ex-employees, including the former UCIL chairman, were convicted in Bhopal of causing death by negligence and sentenced to two years imprisonment and a fine of about $2,000 each, the maximum punishment allowed by law. An eighth former employee was also convicted, but died before judgment was passed. For a long time, the people of Bhopal waited for the verdict, and graved for justice. For 26 long years, because of pendency of cases they were denied from justice. Also, they were given justice after such long time that many of the aggrieved got old without any proper compensation. 3. Bofors scandal: The Bofors scandal was a major corruption scandal in India in the 1980s; the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and several others were accused of receiving kickbacks from Bofors AB for winning a bid to supply India's 155 mm field howitzer. The case came to light during Vishwanath Pratap Singh's tenure as defence minister, and was revealed through investigative journalism by Chitra Subramaniam and N. Ram of the newspapers the Indian Express and The Hindu. The middleman associated with the scandal was Ottavio Quattrocchi, an Italian businessman. While the case was being investigated, Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated on May 21, 1991 for an unrelated cause. With the time, the case continued, but because of no proper evidences, the charges got quashed and one by one, the people involved got their bail. The CBI tried hardly but nothing can be proved and the case got prolonged. After almost 30 years when the Bofors scam

17

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 was committed, no one has been punished yet. Despite glaring proofs of Quattrocchi's involvement, Congress Govt decided to unfreeze his bank accounts and remove the red-croner notice against him. Three other major accused, Rajiv Gandhi, S K Bhatnagar and Win Chadha, are already dead. Hinduja Brothers have been acquitted of all charges. All in all, no major accused are left to be caught in the scam. Despite glaring evidences of the scam being committed, CBI has failed to nail anyone. 4. Harshad Mehtas Case: Harshad Shantila Mehta was an Indian stockbroker. He is alleged to have engineered the rise in the BSE stock exchange in 1992. Exploiting several loopholes in the banking system, Mehta and his associates siphoned off funds from inter-bank transactions and bought shares heavily at a premium across many segments, triggering a rise in the Sensex. When the scheme was exposed, banks started demanding their money back, causing the collapse. He was later charged with 72 criminal offenses, and more than 600 civil action suits were filed against him. Mehta died in 2002 with many litigations still pending against him. 5. Ruchika Case: the Ruchika Girhotra Case involves the molestation of 14-year-old Ruchika Girhotra in 1990 by the Inspector General of Police Shambhu Pratap Singh Rathore (S.P.S. Rathore) in Haryana, India. After she made a complaint, the victim, her family, and her friends were systematically harassed by the police leading to her eventual suicide. On December 22, 2009, after 19 years, 40 adjournments, and more than 400 hearings, the court finally pronounced Rathore guilty under Section 354 IPC (molestation) and sentenced him to six months imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,000. The CBI had opposed Rathore's plea and had sought an enhancement of his sentence from six months to the maximum of two years after his conviction. After waiting for so many years, and continuously bearing the mental torture, the victim opted for suicide. If she was provided with immediate justice, then may be her life could have been saved.

18

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Impact of Pendency of Cases

The Impact of Pendency of cases are many in number as pending cases adversely effects the person along with the state, but it can be clearly illustrated through one line i.e., JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED. The dictum justice delayed is justice denied postulates that an unreasonable delay in the administration of justice constitutes an unconscionable denial of justice. Life and liberty of a citizen guaranteed under article 21 includes life with dignity and liberty with dignity. Liberty must mean freedom from humiliation and indignities at the hands of the authorities to whom the custody of a person may pass temporarily or otherwise, under the law of the land. Delayed justice hampers this dignity of the individual for a long time and thus causes him a loss of respect and dignity in the society members. In all criminal trials, an accused does not prosecute him. The state aided by the complainant prosecutes him. So, it becomes the duty of the state to ensure the accused person his right of speedy trials i.e. getting the judgement either in favour or against as soon as possible. Courts should not examine cases in a piecemeal manner. Once the trial commences, except for the very pressing reasons which makes an adjournment inevitable, precede de die in Diem until the trial is concluded. Justice that comes too late has no meaning to the person it is meant for. During a prolonged and unending trial, the priorities of an accused person towards life change along with the circumstances. The person can also lose everything on account of the pending proceedings, as a result also people lose their belief in justice and in judicial proceedings. In order to have a strong socio-economic system, it is important that each and every stage of trial of an accused should move at a reasonably fast pace. In cases where the accused is the head of the family, and is the only bread earner, his responsibility is also towards the large family left behind him. It is not only about the accused but also his other members of the family who suffer because of delays in trials.

19

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 It is thus, in the interest of the state that the prosecution is able to prove the guilt or innocence of accused at the earliest. Uncalled delay often prejudices the prosecution and at times witnesses are not available or evidences disappear by lapse of time due to various technical and non-technical reasons. When our constitution has given us this fundamental right and our supreme court has recognised and elaborated upon the same in various pronouncements, a realistic and practical approach should be adopted by all concerned to protect this integral and important right. Criminal law remains ineffective without quick trial and prompt punishment. With lapse of time, sometimes the accused loses its chances to win the case as for variety of reasons; witnesses tend to retract from their previous statements. Those who have been won over by threats or inducements turn hostile. Investigating officers and prosecutors also lose their heart and judges feel helpless because of long pendency of cases and prolonged trials. Also, there is an effect on society too, as society becomes cynical as either criminal go scot free and innocents continue to be harassed. Delay in disposal of trials, or pendency of cases amounts to trampling upon the legal and constitutional rights of the accused and refusal of court to act with alacrity in such a situation would be punishing an accused before he is tried and a finding of guilt of sentence is arrived at. This cycle of vices is harmful for the development and peace of any civilised society. It is thus the obligation of the state or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Also, as we have seen in the cases stated above, the pending cases poses an adverse effect on both the country and its people, it causes the people to live with the problem for which they wanted remedy until the case gets decided. In some of the cases due to pendency of case, emergent works get delayed which can cause heavy loss to the person. With the examples also, it was evident that sometimes a person is convicted after his death, or remedy is given after an important period of their life had spent. Thus, it can be said that steps should be taken by government to prevent further pendency and for clearing the backlog of cases.

20

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Steps Undertaken
Government has taken several steps including deciding to increase the strength of Judges in the High Courts and the Supreme Court, setting up of Fast Track Courts, setting up of special tribunals like the Central Administrative Tribunal, Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, etc. for facilitating reduction of pendency of cases in the Courts. Government also has under implementation a scheme of computerization of District and Subordinate Courts to facilitate speedier disposal of cases. Alternative modes of disposal including mediation, negotiation and arbitration have been encouraged. With a view to ensuring expeditious disposal of cases, the Civil Procedure Code has been amended, inter alia, limiting the number of adjournments that can be given to a party and the concept of Plea Bargaining has been introduced through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005. Through the Gram Nyayalays Bill, it is proposed to bring justice to the doorsteps of the rural people by creating over 5000 courts in the intermediate Panchayat level thereby reducing pendency. The report presented by Law Minister in the Lok Sabha for clearing the pendency of such large number of cases is presented here. The source of this information is newspaper article. India Legal News: The Union Government has approved the National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms. The objective is to expedite the pending cases across India. Going by the latest information, almost 57,179 cases were pending in the Supreme Court of India as on June 2011 and number of cases pending in the High Courts were 42,17,903 as on September 2010. Mr. Salman Khurshid, Minister of Law & Justice told that the government will set up expeditious disposal of cases in courts, Government has taken a number of measures as mentioned below: The major goals of the reforms would be: Increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system Enhancing accountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities.

21

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 A Mission Mode approach to infrastructure development of subordinate judiciary is among the major initiatives under the National Mission for Justice Delivery which is approved by the Government. Inadequacy of infrastructure in subordinate courts has been one of the bottlenecks in the speedy delivery of justice. Keeping this in mind in the financial year 2011-12, the allocation for the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for infrastructure development has been increased fivefold from Rs. 100 Cr to Rs. 500 Cr. Funding pattern has also been increased from 50:50 to 75:25 for the states and to continue 90:10 for the NE states. The Government has accepted the recommendations of the Thirteenth Finance Commission to provide a grant of Rs. 5000 crore to the States for improving the justice delivery system in the country over a five year period 2010-15. A grant of Rs.1,000 crore has already been released to the States during the year 2010-11. With the help of these grants, the States can, inter-alia, set up morning/evening/shift special magistrates courts, appoints court managers, establish ADR centres and provide training to mediators/conciliators, organise more Lok Adalats to reduce pendency. The grants also provide for training of judicial officers, strengthening of State Judicial Academies and training of public prosecutors and maintenance of heritage court buildings. In order to computerise the justice delivery system Government is implementing e-Courts Project for the District and Subordinate Courts in the country and up gradation of ICT infrastructure in superior courts at an estimated cost of Rs. 935 crore. The target is to computerize 12,000 courts by 31st March, 2012 and 14,249 courts by 31st March, 2014. Court Management and case management can be done through National Arrears Grid created under the project. The Thirteenth Finance Commission while recommending a grant of Rs.5000 crore made a condition for release of 2nd year instalment only after formulating State Litigation policy. State Litigation policy is to be formulated with the aim to transform government into an efficient and responsible litigant. If the cases involving government are reduced then the courts will have time to dispose of a large number of cases to achieve the target of reducing the pendency.

22

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 Enactment of the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 which provides for establishment of Gram Nyayalayas to improve access to justice to marginalised. The current year allocation has been increased from Rs. 40 crore to Rs. 150 crore. So far 151 Gram Nyayalayas have been notified by the states. All the Chief Justices of High Courts have been requested to launch a campaign to reduce pendency of cases in court from July-December, 2011 and also for filling up vacancies of judges in the High Courts and Subordinate Courts during the same period. Vacancies and delays are inevitably correlated, hence a campaign mode approach for filling vacancies need to be launched. At least 50% of the vacancies could be filled up in respect of subordinate courts by December 2011.

Suggested Remedies
There are many remedies to this problem of pendency of so many cases but all of them cannot be efficiently applied in the present situation. Some of the remedies which could be applied here and also is suggested by law minister in the report presented above are1. Law of Speedy Trial 2. Alternate Dispute Resolving system 3. e Courts

Law of Speedy Trial

Trial of a case means the proceedings whereby the concerned parties put up their pleadings before the appropriate court of law for its consideration so as to arrive at a decision on the dispute. Article 21 of Indian Constitution provides every individual a fundamental right not to be deprived of his life or liberty except in accordance with due procedures prescribed under law. The procedure prescribed under law has to necessarily be reasonable, fair and just. A procedure prescribed by law for depriving a person of his liberty cannot be termed as reasonable, fair and just unless it ensures a speedy trial for determination of the guilt of the accused. No procedure which does not ensure a reasonably quick trial be regarded as reasonable, fair and just and it will fall foul of article 21 and hence is not valid under law. Speedy trial is hence, the

23

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 essence of criminal trial and there can be no doubt that a delay in trial by itself constitutes denial of justice. Speedy trial is in public interest as it serves societal interests also. It is in the interest of all concerned that the guilt or the innocence of the accused is determined as quickly as possible.

Alternate Dispute Resolving system

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) dispute resolution processes and techniques that act as a means for disagreeing parties to come to an agreement short of litigation. ADR basically is an alternative to a formal court hearing or litigation. It is a collective term for the ways that parties can settle disputes, with (or without) the help of a third party. ADR are ways and methods of resolving disputes outside the judicial process (formal litigation court). Despite historic resistance to ADR by many popular parties and their advocates, ADR has gained widespread acceptance among both the general public and the legal profession in recent years. The rising popularity of ADR can be explained by the increasing case load of traditional courts, the perception that ADR imposes fewer costs than litigation, a preference for confidentiality, and the desire of some parties to have greater control over the selection of the individual or individuals who will decide their dispute. Some of the senior judiciary in certain jurisdictions are strongly in favour of the use of mediation to settle disputes. Types and Features ADR is generally classified into at least four types: negotiation, mediation, collaborative law, and arbitration. ADR traditions vary somewhat by country and culture. There are significant common elements which justify a main topic, and each country or region's difference should be delegated to subpages. ADR includes informal tribunals, informal mediative processes, formal tribunals and formal mediative processes. The classic formal tribunal forms of ADR are arbitration and private judges. The classic formal mediative process is referral for mediation before a court appointed mediator or mediation panel. Classic informal methods include social processes, referrals to non-formal authorities (such as a respected member of a trade or social group) and 24

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 intercession. Negotiation within a labor arbitration setting is the use of the tools within a highly formalized and controlled setting. Conceptualizing ADR in this way makes it easy to avoid confusing tools and methods. Dividing lines in ADR processes are often provider driven rather than consumer driven. Educated consumers will often choose to use many different options depending on the needs and circumstances that they face. Finally, it is important to realize that conflict resolution is one major goal of all the ADR processes. If a process leads to resolution, it is a dispute resolution process. "Alternative" dispute resolution is usually considered to be alternative to litigation. It also can be used as a colloquialism for allowing a dispute to drop or as an alternative to violence. In recent years there has been more discussion about taking a systems approach in order to offer different kinds of options to people who are in conflict, and to foster "appropriate" dispute resolution. Other conflicts could be settled by the parties if they had enough support and coaching, and yet other cases need mediation or arbitration. Thus "alternative" dispute resolution usually means a method that is not the courts. "Appropriate" dispute resolution considers all the possible responsible options for conflict resolution that are relevant for a given issue. ADR can increasingly be conducted online, which is known as online dispute resolution. It should be noted, however, that ODR services can be provided by government entities, and as such may form part of the litigation process. Moreover, they can be provided on a global scale, where no effective domestic remedies are available to disputing parties, as in the case of the UDRP and domain name disputes. In this respect, ODR might not satisfy the "alternative" element of ADR. Benefits

25

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 ADR has been both; increasingly used alongside, and integrated formally, into legal systems internationally in order to capitalise on the typical advantages of ADR over litigation:

Suitability for multi-party disputes Flexibility of procedure - the process is determined and controlled by the parties the dispute Lower costs Less complexity ("less is more") Parties choice of neutral third party (and therefore expertise in area of dispute) to direct negotiations/adjudicate Likelihood and speed of settlements Practical solutions tailored to parties interests and needs (not rights and wants,as they may perceive them) Durability of agreements Confidentiality The preservation of relationships; and the preservation of reputations.

E Courts
E-courts is a project established on the year 2005. According to the Project all the courts Including taluk courts will get computerized. As Per the project in 2008 all the District courts are initialized under the project. In 2010 all the District court got computerized. And the Backlog case entries were started. The IT department had 1 system officer and 2 system assistants in each courts. They initiated the services in supreme court in june 2011 the cause list of most of district courts were available in http://lobis.nic.in the website is updated regularly. Now the establishment work is going on taluk courts. The project also includes producing witnesses through video conference. Filing cases, proceedings and all other details in computers, etc.

26

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

27

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

28

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

29

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

Field Work
As a field work, the researcher is going to produce the views of common mass and law professionals in the context of the research topic. For this their own views are quoted here. 1. On talking to Mr. Anand Singh who petitioned a case in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and whose case is pended because of his lawyer. This is his experience which is being quoted here: I have a pending case in the High Court of AP; and my advocate has been giving me reasons, that our case is not listed or sometimes he says it has not reached the bench; this is going ON for the past 12 months; It is an Appeal only in the High Court of AP, due to mis-interpretation and misrepresentation of my case in the lower court (City Civil Courts). To know about the status of my case, I visit their web-site (NIC-HC Case Status) and could not able to get much information other than the case was suppose to be taken up on a date which is already passed due. It is a simple case of Non-payment of Rents and the other party (my tenant) is already defaulting on payments for past 4 years. The case is being handled by my advocate for about 7 years now. I am fed up with the delays. Any guidance will be of immense help to assess the situation. This shows that the petitioner is suffering loss of mental peace and financial loss because of the pendency of his case. 2. The view of a legal professional that is a judge of Andhra Pradesh High Court is acceded through an article published in newspaper. The view of judge when asked about the pending case statusPTI Mar 6, 2010, 06.05pm IST HYDERABAD: Indian judiciary would take 320 years to clear the backlog of 31.28 million cases pending in various courts including High courts in the country, Andhra Pradesh High Court judge Justice V V Rao said- "If one considers the total pendency of cases in the Indian judicial system, every judge in the country will have an average load of about 2,147 cases," while delivering the keynote address on E-Governance in Judiciary. He said, India has 14,576

30

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 judges as against the sanctioned strength of 17,641 including 630 High Court Judges. This works out to a ratio of 10.5 judges per million populations. The Apex court in 2002 had suggested 50 judges per million populations. If the norm of 50 judicial officers per million becomes reality by 2030 when the country's population would be 1.5 to 1.7 billion, the number of judges would go upto 1.25 lakh dealing with 300 million case. A recent study indicated that the number of new cases has direct relationship with increasing literacy rate and awareness, he said. Citing example of Kerala, a high literacy state, he said with awareness, 28 new cases per 1000 population per annum have been added, whereas, Bihar with relatively low literacy rate the figure stands at just three, he said. He opined that the use of Information and Communication Technologies in judiciary helps judicial administration in speedy disposal of cases by providing access to legal and judicial database to judges. 3. When asked by Mr. Sunil Kumar Mandal, who is in Standing Council in Patna High Court about the reasons for Pendency of cases, he ascertained all the points listed earlier in this project. Also, he said that Judicial proceeding applied in Indian Courts are one of the main factors in pendency of cases. This also puts a heavy burden on them of handling more cases at a time.

Thus, it becomes clear from the views of these people that pendency of large number of cases cause a great inconvenience to the common people and they suffer sometimes financially too.

31

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

CONCLUSION
Law deals with the facts of life. In law, as in life, there are no invariable absolutes; neither life, nor law can be reduced to mere but despotic formulae. Thus a fixed time for disposing of a case is not recommendable. It is neither advisable nor practicable to fix any time limit for trial of offences. Any such role is bound to be qualified one. But it is equally true that the trial in every criminal case should be completed without delay and as soon as possible in the shortest time period. This is in accordance with the law as led down by various courts and particularly in the case of KADRA PEHADIA while observing the shocking state of affairs and ruled that no one should be confined in jail or fortune of prolonged trial for more than a reasonable period of time, which we think cannot and should not exceed one year for a sessions trial. This rule needs to be implemented strictly and without any violation. It may sometimes for exceptional reasons be not possible to adhere to this strict rule but there appears no gainsaying that reasonable period of one year prescribed for trials in session court should not be applied to appeals in High court. Beyond this the delay, if any, must be termed as unreasonable and has to be at the cost of the state. Such delays must be treated as contrary to the settled criminal jurisprudence contempt of the Supreme Court and be punished accordingly. Once it is authoritatively held that even a sessions trial with all its necessary trappings (including service, summons, witnesses, evidence recording, adjournments etc.) should and will have to be completed within a stipulated period of one year from the date of registration of the case in court, speedy trial will and should be seen as running counter to the law and spirit of the Constitutional mandate of speedy trial and consequently be punished or compensated. The common mass suffers a lot because of pendency of cases as they face consequences of this delay in form of either loss to their mental peace and reputation in society or financial losses. Also, because of delays in judgement of cases, a long time of ones life pass out in circling the courts, public prosecutors and independent lawyers. Some of the important works also get delayed in

32

PENDING COURT CASES 2011 consequence of this, and thus this had led to loss of trust of the general mass on Indian judiciary and judicial processes. The large number of pendency caused by the arrears and backlog existing in courts always point to the disappointing state of affairs of the Indian Judicial system with 14 judges per million and 1 advocate for 1467 Indians. The courts and the executive are more focussed in increasing the number of judges, staffs and their salaries instead of finding out way and means to ameliorate the present maladies. It is the best opportune time for encouraging Alternative Dispute Resolutions (ADR). According to Justice V.R Krishna Iyer, while inaugurating ADR Centre in Kochi, he graciously conveyed that a legislation should be made wherein lawyers shall try to settle cases rather than take the parties to the court. The Courts should be the last resort and ADR the first resort. He said that there should be a National Movement for ADR in India through Centres like ADR Centre". Thus, its the high time to implement the suggested steps and remedies like ADR, Speedy trials etc., to reduce the pendency of cases and prevent the further Pendency of cases.

33

PENDING COURT CASES 2011

BIBLIOGRAPHY
List of sites:
1. http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/11432-orissa-high-court-case-status.html 2. http://barandbench.com/brief/2/1518/pending-litigations-2010-32225535pending-cases-30-vacancies-in-high-courts-government-increasesjudicial-infrastructure-budget-by-four-times 3. http://www.lawisgreek.com/pending-cases-high-courts-and-supremecourt-india 4. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-0925/news/30200801_1_judicial-officers-subordinate-courts-justice-akganguly 5. http://www.pravasitoday.com/cases-pending-in-supreme-court-and-highcourts 6. http://upscportal.com/civilservices/news/PENDING-CASES-INSUPREME-COURT-AND-HIGH-COURTS 7. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-0306/india/28143242_1_high-court-judges-literacy-rate-backlog 8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_dispute_resolution 9. http://www.sethassociates.com/alternative_dispute_resolution.php 10.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_India

Books referred:
1. Problems of Indian Judiciary Fali S. Nariman 2. Law of Speedy Trial in India B L Arora

34