Budget 2023: The need for reinforcing judicial infrastructure

In the Union Budget for 2022-23, Rs. 858 crore was allocated for the development of judicial infrastructure. That included assistance for Centrally Sponsored Schemes in the lower courts, among others. However, the Ministry of Law and Justice accounted only for 0.1 percent of the Union budget.

While the funds have been utilized to improve the electronic courts platform and bettering the NJDG, it is apparent from the pendency that more needs to be done in the lower courts to put them on the path to reduce the huge case backlog.

What is expected of the upcoming budget?

While lawyers note the need for an increased allocation towards technology to improve judicial infrastructure, lawyers say that unless the infrastructure in district and subordinate courts is improved, changes will not reflect in the larger scheme of things.

Push to digitize district judiciary

With initiatives like making Supreme Court judgments available in vernacular languages, we have started taking steps towards digitalization. Still, one needs to be wary about its advantages reaching granular levels of society, says Manini Roy, Senior Associate at TAS Law.

“Digitalization in the lower judiciary in many states across India appears to be a farcical idea today as they lack basic infrastructure,” Roy added.

Lower judiciary being the first leg of litigation should be accessible to the people belonging to different sections of society, Roy said.

“Except a few major states, the E-courts app and website do not have updated record of orders of courts. E-courts which was approved as a concept in 2007 has evolved in these years. However, the project, in its entirety, is marred by delays.”

“What I am looking forward to from this Budget is some allocation to improving the infrastructure of the District Judiciary, with a specific focus on improving the IT infrastructure. With E-filing being made compulsory in many courts, basic facilities like wi-fi are still not available,” said Mihir Govilkar, partner at Govilkar and Associates.

Roadmap for timely implementation of central schemes

A section of lawyers feels that while budgetary allocation is adequate to fill the infrastructural gaps, the central schemes to improve the infrastructure mired in multiple challenges such as federal hurdles, which lead to underutilisation of funds by the states.

Ashutosh K. Srivastava, Senior Associate, SKV Law Office, notes that the asymmetrical distribution of funds between states and under-utilisations of funds was due to inflexibility of the central schemes.

“On a macro level, the effectiveness of budgetary allocation can be fortified by having a timely performance audit of the utilisation of funds meant for infrastructure projects by an independent agency such as the Comptroller & Auditor General of India (CAG),” he said.

Srivastava feels that unless policy level changes are introduced, the judicial infrastructure would be mired in inadequacies. He thus looks forward to a budget where allocations come with a roadmap for timely implementation of central schemes.

Upgrading infrastructure meaningless without an adequate workforce

Anushkaa Arora, principal and founder, ABA Law Office, notes that the lack of an adequate workforce is one of the primary reasons for under-utilisation of the allocated budget.

“Without manpower, the incentives of technological upgradation cannot be realised to its capacity, going back to square one. Hence, Union budget 2023 must include incentives for manpower to join the judiciary in capacities which will help in improving the infrastructure.”

Introducing technology in alternative dispute resolution

While the judiciary is on the path to improving its infrastructure with the aid of technology, budgetary allocation to improve centres for arbitration and mediation continues to be a far cry.

Prominent High Courts such as Madras and Delhi have their arbitration centres, but there is a need to allocate funds to build such centres across the country, say a section of lawyers.

Arbitration is a mechanism for resolving disputes between parties without having to initiate a case in the court. A neutral person (arbitrator) is appointed to adjudicate the dispute and the judgment of an arbitrator is legally enforceable. Although it is cheaper than a regular court case, it requires basic infrastructure such as a hall, computers and so on.