Hyderabad: The judiciary has been sharply criticised on social media and also by a cross section of people, for the increase in the number of pending cases, from the Supreme Court to trial courts across the country.
In the top court of the country, the shortage of judges is one of the main reasons for cases being kept pending. But the judiciary is facing criticism for ‘lacking commitment’ to ensure speedy justice to the needy and of giving unnecessary priority to sensational cases.
Justice B. Chandra Kumar, a retired judge of the erstwhile Hyderabad High Court, tends to agree: “It is unfortunate that judges today lack the tendency to respond to public cause, unlike earlier. This is more particularly seen in cases pertaining to the have-nots and would certainly lead to criticism from a cross-section of society.”
He said in cases where prominent people are involved, a galaxy of senior advocates appears on their behalf, which places some sort of psychological pressure on the judges of the Supreme Court and High Court to take such cases on priority.
Justice P. Lakshman Reddy, a former judge of the erstwhile AP High Court, said judges have to change their tendency to give priority to sensational cases as this reflects poorly on the decorum of the judiciary.
Maintaining that the judiciary cannot alone be blamed for the pendency of cases, he said the police and executive and, sometimes — particularly in civil and arbitration cases — even advocates, are responsible for the mounting arrears in courts across states.
Justice Reddy explained that the procedure is for every High Court in the country to notify the vacancy of a judge six months prior to his/her retirement and recommend the name of either an advocate from the Bar or an in service officer to be inducted to the post.
He pointed out that though many High Courts follow this system scrupulously, the central government is not responding to such requests. This attitude of the Centre is seen in many of the appointments of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts in various states, he said.
Justice Reddy said it was the responsibility of the state governments to fill up the vacancies in the lower courts and also sanction required new courts and judges posts as per the judge to people ratio.
He felt that the Centre and the Supreme Court must look into the need for constituting a committee to study the reasons for the delay in appointment of judges and disposing of cases so that a rational system is adopted for rendering justice.
A judge of the Telangana High Court who spoke on condition of anonymity felt that the criticism of the judicial system is not based on knowledge of the root cause of the issue but on the number of pending cases.
While admitting that there is a delay in disposing of cases, he said that 80 per cent of pending cases in the trial courts are civil and family disputes.
He pointed out very pertinently that more than 60 per cent of cases in the Supreme Court and High Courts in this country are against state governments and the slow response of the state apparatus to public grievances in petty matters such as issuing of ration cards, passports and even tap connections, forces people to approach the courts.
