The Issue of Judicial Delays in India: A Constitutional Concern

Waiting can be frustrating. In India, the judicial system often leaves people waiting for long stretches without any clarity on their cases. According to recent figures, as of September, there were about 5.34 crore cases pending in Indian courts. The reasons for such a massive backlog include unavailable legal counsel, missing documents and witnesses, and stays on proceedings from higher courts. This is not just a logistical issue; it’s an experience that deeply affects citizens.

When we think of waiting in the context of law, it becomes more than just an inconvenience. It morphs into an encounter with the state; for instance, it can feel like being stopped at a police checkpoint or being denied a driver’s license. The experience of waiting for justice feels like a failure of constitutional rights, where the delayed response to grievances turns into a vivid manifestation of state power.

In this context, the concept of waiting takes on a “choreography.” You arrive at court, find a seat, and realize that your turn may never come at all. Queries often go unanswered, and time slips by without acknowledgment. The realization often strikes that asking too many questions might lead to frustration or even trouble. Consequently, people learn to play the waiting game—a skill for survival.

Lawyers face similar experiences daily. Hearings that are supposed to start at a specific time often happen much later or not at all. Clients are told, “This is just how it works”; they normalize the delays, even though they know it shouldn’t be this way. While the Constitution discusses important concepts like equality, dignity, and liberty, it feels inadequate to capture the ongoing reality of judicial delays.

Under Article 14, which promises equality before the law, the widespread delays violate this principle. Some people wait endlessly while others are heard almost immediately. Similarly, the right to liberty under Article 21 becomes meaningless when justice is delayed. By the time people get their bail or appeals heard, it’s often too late to make a significant difference.

By failing to recognize waiting as a fundamental violation of constitutional rights, we ignore how power operates through time. This Republic Day, it’s important to acknowledge that delays in justice aren’t just an inconvenience; they signal a deeper constitutional failure.

How Long is Too Long?

India’s constitutional framework is primarily concerned with visible exercises of power, like arrests or demolitions. However, when it comes to inaction—the kind that allows cases to drag on for years—the judiciary struggles to address this issue. Courts have made attempts to acknowledge the backlog but often fail to treat such delays as violations of rights.

Although the law recognizes excessive delays as unfair, they are usually labeled as exceptions. This means that delays are seen as deviations rather than a standard part of how the system operates. On a daily basis, witnesses often experience a kind of “waiting hierarchy,” where some files move quickly while others languish without attention.

The courts have pondered the question: How long is too long? Yet, there is a stark difference in how delays feel for the state versus the individual. While institutions may wait without significant cost, the toll on individuals—emotionally, financially, and psychologically—is immense. This inequality erodes the essence of the rule of law, molding citizens into a mindset of subordination while empowering those who can sidestep the queues.

Delays also entrap people in a system that should serve them, creating pressure to remain in a situation that no longer feels responsive. As time drags on, the prospect of abandoning the pursuit of justice becomes overwhelmingly difficult.

For example, unlawful practices, like illegal property demolitions that get reviewed only after the damage is done, continue because the law lags far behind. By the time a decision is finally made, the harm has already been inflicted, thereby diffusing accountability.

Waiting transforms itself into a subtle form of governance. As time passes, it becomes a natural part of life, and the authority behind it feels just as ordinary. In contrast, the Constitution does not recognize “natural” power—it demands clear and justified power.

Unexplained delays show a lack of accountability from the state; the delayed justice does not treat citizens with the respect they deserve. No ill intentions are required; sometimes, routine administrative habits can lead to significant inequalities in how citizens experience their constitutional rights.

To enact meaningful reforms, waiting must be redefined as a violation of constitutional guarantees. The Supreme Court needs to move beyond views centered solely on efficiency and focus more on citizens’ rights.

Delays will inevitably happen, but they should not be dismissed as mere inconveniences. Rather, they should be seen for what they truly are: a slow erosion of constitutional values that often go unnoticed, yet are profoundly indicative of the power dynamics in play.

Hashtags

JudicialDelays #IndiaJusticeSystem #ConstitutionalRights #JusticeForAll #RuleOfLaw #LegalReform #CitizensRights #EqualityBeforeLaw

Original Text – https://scroll.in/article/1090161/indias-judicial-delays-are-a-constitutional-failing?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=public