Stop blaming judiciary for pendency of cases: CJI

Speaking at the ‘Mediation Awareness Programme’ organized by the Tamil Nadu Mediation and Reconciliation Centre and the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy, he said the prevailing three crore pendency is not owing non-performance of judges but owing to several other aspects including shortage of judges. 

He said the Supreme Court in America dealt with a mere 80 cases per year while judges here on an average handle as many as 89 cases per day. Noting that there can be no comparison in this regard, he said the performance of our judges by any yardstick were exemplary and commendable especially taking into account that as per the Law Commission report in 1997 there ought to be 40,000 judges while as of now a mere 18,000 judges remain.

Also, pointing out that during the past 30 years alone litigations have been on the rise with growing population, literacy and awareness, the Chief Justice of India said “We are not particular on the number of judges, we are only keen on reasonable number of judges. But the mechanism that needs to be rolled out should be for the next 10 years accounting for old cases and the new ones as well. The law commission is with us on this.”

He also noted that while the Centre has put the onus on the States to increase the number of judges, he said the planning must include the foremost aspect that 80 per cent of the pending cases remain only in the eight populated states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. He said the focus must be on these eight states and providing the necessary judges and infrastructures will bring down the pendency to a great extent. He also added that a report has been compiled by the Supreme Court research wing in this regard and will be handed over to the Government soon. However, the CJI on noting that while increasing the number of judges will also enable quality judgements, he said another sure way of bringing down pendency is through mediation. 

Lauding the Madras High Court for initiating the process of mediation at the first place, Thakur said that it was imperative that the judges should made a conscious decision to figure out whether the case is fit for mediation or adjudication and not wait until it reached the stage of trail. He said the mediation process aids quick disposal, curtails the process of appeal and above all curtails the burden on the institution to a great extent. The CJI also hailed mediation as a panacea for both the judicial system as well as the parties concerned.