Indian Lower Judiciary: Pendency and Inefficiency plaguing the system

Revamping the Indian Lower Judiciary has become a pressing need for the smooth functioning of the justice system. Pendency and inefficiency are among the major issues that need to be addressed. Read here to learn more.

The Indian judiciary stands as the cornerstone of justice, yet its foundational tier, the subordinate judiciary, remains plagued by inefficiencies, delays, and acute backlog.

According to a recent Supreme Court Constitution Bench ruling, stagnation in the lower judiciary is linked to the staggering 4.69 crore cases pending in district courts, which severely hampers justice delivery across the country.

Despite efforts to modernize the judicial system, the burden of pendency and procedural inefficiencies continues to cripple the judicial process at the grassroots level.

Structure of Indian Lower Judiciary

India’s subordinate judiciary forms the backbone of its judicial system, handling nearly 90% of all cases.

Don't miss ClearIAS updates: Add ClearIAS as a preferred source on Google Add →

Comprised of three main levels, it serves as the first point of contact for most litigants:

1. District & Sessions Courts: These are the highest trial courts in a district, presided over by District Judges who manage both civil and criminal jurisdictions.
2. Senior Civil Judge / Chief Judicial Magistrate Courts: These handle mid-level civil disputes and serious criminal cases, forming the intermediate adjudication body.
3. Civil Judge (Junior Division) / Judicial Magistrate First Class: These courts manage lower-value civil suits and routine criminal matters.

At the administrative level, the High Courts have oversight, ensuring that uniform judicial standards are maintained.

State governments manage court infrastructure and personnel, conducting recruitment through judicial services exams.

Despite the robust framework, the lower judiciary faces severe constraints in staffing, infrastructure, and procedural efficiency.

Recruitment Pathways in the Subordinate Judiciary (Short & Clear)

1. Lower Judicial Service (LJS)

• Recruits fresh law graduates (0–7 years’ experience).
• Exams conducted by State PSCs or High Courts.
• Entry posts: Civil Judge (Junior Division) / JMFC.
• Promotion through departmental exams, ACRs, and seniority-cum-merit.
• Forms the base of the district judiciary, handling routine civil and criminal cases.

2. Higher Judicial Service (HJS)

• Recruits advocates with 7+ years of practice, as per Article 233(2).
• Conducted by High Courts.
• Direct entry into District Judge / Additional District Judge posts.
• Brings experienced practitioners into senior trial courts, strengthening quality of adjudication.

Key Challenges: Pendency, Vacancies, and Overload

1. Massive Pendency of Cases: As of 2025, approximately 69 crore cases are pending across the judicial system, with 77% of this burden falling on the subordinate judiciary.

• District judges face overwhelming caseloads, with each district judge handling over 1,000 to 1,500 new filings annually, apart from the existing backlog.
• The growing pendency not only erodes public trust in the justice system but also delays the delivery of justice, especially in civil and land disputes, where cases stretch over decades.

2. Staffing Gaps and Vacancies: Despite a sanctioned strength of 25,843 judges, only 21,122 positions are filled, leaving a persistent 3% vacancy rate.

• With only 21 judges per million people (far below the 50 per million recommended by the Law Commission), this shortfall exacerbates the backlog and increases case disposal times.
• Compounding the issue is the inexperienced judicial officer pool; many new judges are often appointed without sufficient courtroom exposure, leading to poorly reasoned judgments.

3. Structural and Procedural Overload: Judges spend a significant portion of their day on clerical tasks, such as processing case filings, summons, and hearings.

• Archaic procedural frameworks, including the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), which mandates multiple stages for decrees and mandatory mediation, create unnecessary delays.
• Execution of decrees is another major bottleneck, with 70% of civil cases delayed in execution, stretching the timeframe from years to decades.

Digitalization and Technological Solutions

While India has made strides in judicial digitalization, the e-Courts Mission Mode Project and the digitization of 506 crore pages and 65 crore VC hearings have shown significant progress.

• However, the adoption of technology is uneven, with only 21 Virtual Courts operating across 17 states, making it difficult to scale these advancements nationwide.
• AI-powered case triage, which could help prioritize old and delayed cases or streamline case listings, is still in its infancy.
• Though there has been a push for e-filing systems and digital case management, the absence of a uniform, tech-driven model across all districts leaves much to be desired.

Key Initiatives for Indian lower judiciary

Several initiatives have been rolled out to address the structural bottlenecks in the lower judiciary:

1. National Mission for Justice Delivery & Legal Reforms: This flagship initiative focuses on reducing arrears through procedural reforms, infrastructure enhancements, and judicial accountability mechanisms.
2. Judicial Infrastructure Expansion: Under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme, court halls have been increased to 22,372, and residential units for judges have grown to 19,851, with an allocation of over ₹12,101 crore. While this is a welcome step, infrastructure alone cannot resolve the deep-seated procedural inefficiencies.
3. Fast Track Courts (FTCs) and Special Mechanisms: Fast Track Courts and Special Courts dedicated to specific cases like POCSO and crimes against women have seen success in reducing the time taken for these cases, but their coverage is limited, and many high-priority cases remain backlog-ridden.
4. Legislative Reforms: Amendments to key laws like the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Commercial Courts Act, and the Mediation Act aim to streamline procedural bottlenecks, promote quicker settlement mechanisms, and reduce the overall litigation burden.

However, these reforms have yet to demonstrate tangible, wide-scale improvements in case disposal timelines, particularly in lower courts.

Reforming the Indian lower Judiciary

1. Dedicated “Ministerial Courts”: To address the clerical burden on judges, it is recommended that a separate set of “Ministerial Courts” be created in every district. These courts would handle non-adjudicative tasks like filing, processing, and summons issuance, thereby freeing the core courts to focus on substantive hearings.
2. Mandatory Apprenticeship for New Judges: A structured apprenticeship for newly appointed judges, where they are attached to High Courts for 6-12 months, can provide crucial courtroom training, teaching new judges the nuances of order writing, judgment drafting, and trial management before they take independent charge.
3. Execution and Case Disposal Reform: The Civil Procedure Code needs an overhaul to merge decree stages, reduce the need for compulsory asset disclosures, and introduce digital execution portals to streamline the execution of judgments. This can help in drastically reducing procedural delays in enforcement.
4. AI-Driven Case Management: AI-based tools can be implemented to automate triage, prioritise old cases, track misuse of adjournments, and create smart cause lists, significantly reducing human-driven inefficiencies. The integration of big data analytics would enable better case management and faster disposal.
5. Human Resource Expansion: India urgently needs an additional 10,000+ judges to meet even the minimum ratio of judges per million people, ensuring that cases are heard and disposed of promptly.
6. Legislative Simplification: Reforms to simplify mandatory mediation timelines, cooling-off periods in divorce cases, and ambiguities in rent laws are necessary to unclog the entry points for litigation and prevent unnecessary cases from overburdening the system.

Conclusion

The lower judiciary is the bedrock of India’s justice delivery system, yet its current state of overburdened infrastructure, structural inefficiencies, and insufficient human resources presents a critical challenge to timely justice.

While reforms such as e-courts and specialised courts show promise, systemic change is necessary.

To meet the growing demands of litigation and restore public faith in the judicial process, India must adopt data-driven, technology-enabled reforms and professionalise the judiciary at every level.

Only with holistic procedural reform and substantial human resource expansion can the backlog be reduced, and justice can be delivered swiftly and fairly.