India justice report calls for reforms in judiciary through honest assessment

The Law Commission in 1987 recommended that the judge-to-population ratio should be 50 judges per 10 lakh population.

However, as highlighted in the IJR in January 2025, the actual number of sitting judges—including those in the Supreme Court—stood at 21,285, an increase of almost 6 per cent from 2022, but still well below the present sanctioned strength of 26,927.

Based on the 2011 Census and sanctioned strengths, a Rajya Sabha response puts the judge-to-population ratio at 21 judges per 10 lakh population. Based on population projections from March 2025, the actual strength of the bench stands at 15 judges per 10 lakh population. Even if the sanctioned strength were met, the ratio would still be only 19 judges per 10 lakh population—well below the Law Commission’s recommendation.

However, the silver lining is that there has been an improvement in the judiciary’s per capita expenditure. Human resource capacity has also seen some progress, with judicial vacancies reduced in select states. Despite rising workloads, subordinate courts have improved case clearance rates.

One ongoing concern is the shortage of court staff, especially in High Courts. According to the report, High Court staff vacancies continue to average around 25 per cent. In 2025, staff vacancies in 13 High Courts ranged from 20 per cent to just below 50 per cent.

The trial court, or subordinate courts as they are known in India, is one of the most important components of the justice delivery system, as the majority of cases begin at this level. Despite this, the total sanctioned strength of judges in these courts stands at 25,771, averaging 18 judges per 10 lakh population. Between 2016–17 and 2025, the overall sanctioned strength of lower court judges increased by just 3,224.

As highlighted in the report, the “actual number of judges on the bench paints a grimmer picture”. Currently, 20,478 district court judges serve 1.4 billion people—averaging approximately 15 judges per 10 lakh population. High levels of vacancy continue to plague the district judiciary. Between 2018–19 and 2025, overall judicial vacancies in subordinate courts hovered between 21 and 22 per cent. The increase in vacancies was worst in Sikkim, rising from 17 per cent in 2018–19 to 34 per cent in 2025.

This adverse judge-to-population ratio results in an increased workload for judges. The average workload per judge has significantly increased as case pendencies have risen. At the end of 2024, most High Courts—apart from Sikkim, Tripura, and Meghalaya—averaged over 1,000 cases per judge, with judges in the Allahabad and Madhya Pradesh High Courts facing workloads of approximately 15,000 cases each.

At the district court level, the average workload rose to 2,200 cases per judge, with substantial state variations. Twenty-eight states/UTs recorded an average of over 500 cases per judge. Karnataka judges managed nearly 1,750, Kerala 3,800, and Uttar Pradesh 4,300 cases per judge. Only seven states/UTs maintained workloads below 300 cases per judge.

Infrastructure

For an institution to function effectively, both human resources and infrastructure are vital. In the case of the judiciary, inadequate court infrastructure directly affects human resources as well. The IJR rightly points out that a shortage of court halls impacts judge appointments. While support staff in the judiciary can adjust to office space limitations, a judge cannot function without a designated courtroom.

Despite consistent efforts to build more court halls for subordinate courts, a 15 per cent shortfall persists relative to the sanctioned strength of judges. Between 2022 and 2025, sanctioned positions increased by 1,140, while court halls increased by only 1,031—maintaining the same shortfall.

As of 2025, there are 22,045 court halls available for the 20,478 sitting judges. However, if all 25,771 sanctioned positions were filled, the 15 per cent shortfall would remain. In 2025, all but ten states/UTs recorded a shortfall in court halls.

Responsibility for developing judicial infrastructure lies with state governments. Since 1993–94, the central government has been releasing funds under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for the Development of Infrastructure Facilities. These funds are used for improving physical infrastructure, including court buildings, residential accommodation for judicial officers, lawyers’ halls, digital computer rooms, and toilet complexes. The scheme has been extended to 2025–26 with a total financial outlay of ₹9,000 crore, of which the Centre’s share is ₹5,307 crore.

Legal Aid

Access to justice is a fundamental right. However, due to the high cost of litigation—particularly legal fees—justice remains out of reach for much of the population. In this context, free legal aid becomes imperative. Unfortunately, the state of legal aid in India has been far from satisfactory. To begin with, there has been a 38 per cent drop in the number of paralegal volunteers since 2019.

Currently, national per capita spending on legal aid averages just six rupees. Over five years (2017–2023), the overall legal aid budget has increased, with states increasingly taking the lead in funding. However, given the broad mandate of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, nearly 80 per cent of the population qualifies for legal aid—rendering the current budget grossly insufficient.

The India Justice Report highlights a host of challenges the Indian judiciary is facing. It is crucial that policymakers take note of its findings—because any reform must begin with an honest assessment and acknowledgment of the problems.