Centre, Supreme Court mulling radical judicial reform to ease higher courts’ load

NEW DELHI: A radical judicial reform is on the anvil — the government and the Supreme Court are actively considering a new judicial mechanism, courts of appeal — that will be set up to help clear the huge backlog of pending cases.

The proposal moots that post hearings in district courts, appeals in all civil and criminal cases will be heard in the courts of appeal. These new courts will be placed higher than the district courts but below the high courts.

High courts will only hear core constitutional matters. After a court of appeal verdict in a civil or criminal matter, a litigant can only appeal before the Supreme Court, not a high court.

Big Admin Exercise
Since procedural and material costs of a Supreme Court appeal are quite high, the number of appeals to be filed in the top court after a verdict from court of appeals is expected to be low. Judges for these new courts will be recruited from among the “brighter members” of the cadre of district court judges as well as from the Bar.

A number of courts of appeal is likley to be formed under the jurisdiction of each high court, and case disposal norms or targets may be set for these courts. Setting up the courts of appeal will be a big administrative exercise and may require changes in some rules governing the present system.

The idea that an alternative mechanism was needed to hear all statutory appeals and therefore, decongest the legal system was firmed up at a recent top-level meeting attended by senior officials from the Prime Minister’s Office, the cabinet secretary, and secretaries from ministries of finance, department of personnel and training, law and Niti Aayog. Two Supreme Court judges represented the top court at the meeting. ET has reviewed the minutes of the meeting.

Criminal and civil appeals account for most pending cases — many cases lingering on for years or even decades.

At the meeting, both judges and officials noted the need for speedy delivery of justice and unburdening higher courts. The meeting also took note of data that showed the huge burden on high courts.

The minutes of the meeting noted: “Delay in decision of criminal cases, particularly in category of serious cases where granting bail was not safe, was not a satisfactory situation.. search for structural alternative was the imperative need of the hour”.

The meeting also noted that other areas of appellate jurisdiction in high courts, for example, second appeals, matrimonial matters, accidental claim cases, land acquisition cases, also call for prompt disposal but get delayed because of high pendency.