Discuss adjournments and case pending.

• The President of India, Droupadi Murmu, has criticized the culture of judicial adjournments, citing the silent suffering of the poor and rural population due to fear of delay in case resolution.
• The issue is rooted in the lack of time-bound adjudication of cases, with the introduction of the tribunal system through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976.
• Major reasons for the delay include the judge-population ratio, lack of time-bound filling of judges, additional charges of multiple courts, enactment of legislation without prior judicial-impact assessment, and inordinate delay in bringing witnesses to courts.
• The present strength of judges in High Courts is 770, or 30% of vacancies, resulting in a huge backlog of cases.
• The Supreme Court, functioning with nearly a full sanctioned strength of 34 judges, is challenged before the Supreme Court, leading to a huge case pendency.
• Judges, from the district judiciary to the Supreme Court, are working overtime to meet the huge pendency demand, causing mental stress and potential errors.
• Suggestions include implementing “Mediation” as an alternative mechanism, implementing “judicial impact assessment” of every legislation, collaborating with the High Court and State government to fill up proposed vacancies in the district judiciary, and avoiding additional charges on judges.