It is heartening to note that in recent times, some judges of the Supreme Court and some high courts have taken a serious note of certain deficiencies and negligent attitude of justice delivery systems in some of the courts

The India Justice Report 2025 has revealed that 24.8 % of the cases in different State High courts are pending for more than 20 years; another 25.9% cases are pending for 10 to 20 years duration, while 49.3% of the cases are pending from 0 to 5 years. Pointing out that most of the States have a long list of pending cases, the report stated that in Allahabad High Court, over 40% of cases are more than 20 years old. Is this data not enough to call for judicial reforms?

If there was ever a need to reduce the pendency of cases, it is now. It is said in countries like China, a five year ceiling for final disposal of cases is stipulated. It is heartening to note that in recent times, some judges of the Supreme Court and some high courts have taken a serious note of certain deficiencies and negligent attitude of justice delivery systems in some of the courts.

Last week, the apex court has termed as "very disturbing" the practice of certain high courts" reserving judgments for eternity", in breach of litigants' fundamental right to speedy justice and asked the Registrars general of all the 25 high courts to submit details of cases in which orders were reserved before January 31 and verdicts were yet to be pronounced.

The SC came out with these observations when it was informed that four appellants had filed appeals, one in 2012, two in 2014 and one in 2018 and the Jharkhand H C had reserved verdicts in these cases in 2022 and verdicts are yet to be pronounced. The S C bench stated that "it cannot be allowed to go on like this (reserving judgments and forgetting about it)". It is said that a H C judge has reserved verdicts in over 150 cases -- 13 in 2020, over 70 cases each in 2022 and 2023. This indicates that there is need for stipulating a time limit for pronouncement of judgments "reserved".

In another case, the Punjab and Haryana HC has expressed strongest resentment over a convict being kept in jail nine months beyond his actual sentence and observed that the situation highlighted a troubling gap where access to legal remedies is influenced not by merits of the case, but by one's financial means. The court observed that "when the State itself becomes the violator of liberty through negligence or apathy, it sets a dangerous precedent that erodes faith in the judicial system".

In another case, the Kolkata H C acquitted a man who spent eight years in jail for the alleged murder of a friend and sharply criticised the police for mishandling the investigation.   These and similar other instances make it clear that there is need for drastic Judicial Reforms, and the Judiciary and the Parliament would do well to bestow attention on this vital aspect. The announcement made by the CJI Justice Gavai that he will not accept any office after retirement is a loaded one and it has many significant aspects. Many feel that the judicial reforms should include a Law or Rule prohibiting judges from accepting any position after retirement.

-P A Rama Rao