India’s case backlog reflects nation’s 'legal health': Supreme Court Justice N Kotiswar Singh

Supreme Court Justice N Kotiswar Singh on Saturday described India’s the massive case pendency in Indian courts as a reflection of the country’s 'legal health'.

He said that the scale of pending cases was evidence of the systemic challenges facing the justice system.

Referring to data from the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDC), Justice Singh observed the numbers should be viewed as an indicator of the justice system’s condition.

He said that there were approximately 1.1 crore civil cases and about 3.9 crore criminal cases pending, taking the total pendency to nearly 5 crore cases, including writs and other matters. He added,

"This data is such valuable information. It is valuable because it represents the status and the health of our nation, the legal health of the nation. Legal health means it shows how many 'diseases' and 'ailments' we have; some may be serious, others not, but we are suffering from so many 'ailments'.”

He added that understanding the causes behind pendency was necessary for reform.

“We analyse why these are. Try to give 'prescriptions'. Therefore why it is important for the nation, for the judges, how to deal with this pendency.”

He was speaking at a national conference on the “Evolution of Arbitration in India: Today’s Scenario, Emerging Challenges & Proactive Reforms” hosted by Dharmashastra National Law University (DNLU) in Jabalpur.

Speaking on the theme of the conference, Justice Singh highlighted the growing role of arbitration in resolving commercial disputes.

“Arbitration is emerging as a very key component of the dispute resolution mechanism. It not merely an alternative to courtroom, in fact it has become a cornerstone of international commercial dispute resolution,” observed Justice Singh.

He noted that arbitration offers advantages such as party autonomy and procedural flexibility.

During his address to law students, Justice Singh emphasised the foundational role of the Constitution’s Preamble in guiding the legal profession.

“Why I say so because this (preamble) is the mool mantra (root chant) of our Indian judiciary. It is the foundational basis of our own existence in this country. Therefore all our activities as lawyers, as judges, as law students, must be inspired by these virtues, principles embedded in the Preamble.”

Encouraging students to internalise constitutional values, he suggested that the Preamble should become part of a lawyer’s daily practice. He requested,

“Please learn the Preamble by heart. When you start your day (with the Preamble) - just like many of you I know many are very religious they would start with mantra - as you will be graduating as lawyers then as judges and perhaps lawmakers, therefore you must keep these ideals in mind.”

Justice Singh also cautioned students against misusing artificial intelligence (AI) tools for plagiarism in academic work.

“In the age of AI, you cannot resort to plagiarism so easily because software is available. AI will find out what is the original source and whether it is drawn from the internet,” said Justice Singh.

While acknowledging the usefulness of technology, he stressed that it should enhance creativity rather than replace it. He stated,

“AI is to enhance our efficiency, but not by copying. The efficiency to move your creative.”

Justice Singh also urged students to equip themselves for the evolving legal profession and contribute to India’s future development. Using a mnemonic framework, he encouraged them to strengthen their foundations and continuously adapt to change.

“Forge ahead to make this nation towards a Viksit Bharat of 2047,” he said in conclusion.

The conference brought together judges and legal practitioners to discuss developments in arbitration law.

The event also featured addresses by Justices Vivek Rusia, Vinay Saraf, Tejas Karia and Supreme Court advocate Siddharth R Gupta.

Speaking at the conference, Justice Tejas Karia highlighted how arbitration practice in India has evolved.

“Now, gone are the days where arbitration used to be in the weekend or on holiday, now the arbitration happens during the day time so that you can utilize your time instead of having one matter and having to wait in the court,” he said.

Justice Karia also noted that arbitration cannot function independently of the broader legal system.

“Arbitration doesn't work in abstract, it has to work with the entire system of law. It is not an alternative to litigation, it is parallel to the litigation process,” stated Justice Karia.

Justice Vinay Saraf flagged growing concerns about inefficiencies in arbitration proceedings. He observed,

“Arbitration proceedings have begun to mirror the very delay and complexities of the court system they were meant to avoid.”

He said the gap between theory and practice remains a major challenge.

“One of most significant challenges confronting arbitration in India today is the persistent gap between the theoretical promise of arbitration and the practical experience of arbitration proceedings.”

Justice Saraf pointed out that frequent court interventions were contributing to delays.

“Still we are not able to stop the parties to the arbitration agreement to approach the courts frequently. This is the biggest challenge. The parties to the arbitration agreement often approach courts before arbitration, during arbitration, and after arbitration. Because of that the arbitration proceedings are delayed, because of that the finality of the award delays, because of that the execution of the award delays,” he added.