Examining pendency of cases in the Judiciary

Roshni Sinha - August 8, 2019

Yesterday, Parliament passed a Bill to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court from 30 to 33 (excluding the Chief Justice of India). The Bill was introduced in view of increasing pendency of cases in the Supreme Court. In 2012, the Supreme Court approved the Scheme of National Court Management System to provide a framework for case management. The scheme estimated that with an increase in literacy, per capita income, and population, the number of new cases filed each year may go up to 15 crore over the next three decades, which will require at least 75,000 judges. In this blog, we analyse the pendency of cases at all three levels of courts, i.e. the Supreme Court, the Highs Courts, and the subordinate courts, and discuss the capacity of these courts to dispose of cases.

Pendency in courts has increased over the years; 87% of all pending cases are in subordinate courts

Sources: Court News, 2006, Supreme Court of India; National Data Judicial Grid accessed on August 7, 2019; PRS.

Overall, the pendency of cases has increased significantly at every level of the judicial hierarchy in the last decade. Between 2006 and now, there has been an overall increase of 22% (64 lakh cases) in the pendency of cases across all courts. As of August 2019, there are over 3.5 crore cases pending across the Supreme Court, the High Courts, and the subordinate courts. Of these, subordinate courts account for over 87.3% pendency of cases, followed by 12.5% pendency before the 24 High Courts. The remaining 0.2% of cases are pending with the Supreme Court. The primary reason for growing pendency of cases is that the number of new cases filed every year has outpaced the number of disposed of cases. This has resulted in a growing backlog of cases.

In High Courts and subordinate courts, over 32 lakh cases pending for over 10 years

Sources: National Data Judicial Grid accessed on August 7, 2019; Court News, 2006-17, Supreme Court of India; PRS.

In the High Courts, over 8.3 lakh cases have been pending for over 10 years. This constitutes 19% of all pending High Court cases. Similarly, in the subordinate courts, over 24 lakh cases (8%) have been pending for over 10 years. Overall, Allahabad High Court had the highest pendency, with over seven lakh cases pending as of 2017.

Despite high pendency, some High Courts have managed to reduce their backlog. Between 2006 and 2017, pendency of cases reduced the most in Madras High Court at a rate of 26%, followed by Bombay High Court at 24%. Conversely, during the same period, the pendency of cases doubled in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, and increased by 2.5 times in Karnataka High Court.

As a result of pendency, number of under-trials in prison is more than double that of convicts

Sources: Prison Statistics in India, 2015, National Crime Record Bureau; PRS.

Over the years, as a result of growing pendency of cases for long periods, the number of undertrials (accused awaiting trial) in prisons has increased. Prisons are running at an over-capacity of 114%. As of 2015, there were over four lakh prisoners in jails. Of these, two-thirds were undertrials (2.8 lakh) and the remaining one-third were convicts.

The highest proportion of undertrials (where the number of inmates was at least over 1,000) were in J&K (85%), followed by Bihar (82%). A total of 3,599 undertrials were detained in jails for more than five years. Uttar Pradesh had the highest number of such undertrials (1,364) followed by West Bengal (294).

One interesting factor to note is that more criminal cases are filed in subordinate courts than in High Courts and Supreme Court. Of the cases pending in the subordinate courts (which constitute 87% of all pending cases), 70% of cases were related to criminal matters. This increase in the pendency of cases for long periods over the years may have directly resulted in an increase in the number of undertrials in prisons. In a statement last year, the Chief Justice of India commented that the accused in criminal cases are getting heard after serving out their sentence.

Vacancies in High Courts and Subordinate Courts affect the disposal of cases

Sources: Court News, 2006-17, Supreme Court of India; PRS.

Vacancy of judges across courts in India has affected the functioning of the judiciary, particularly in relation to the disposal of cases. Between 2006 and 2017, the number of vacancies in the High Courts has increased from 16% to 37%, and in the subordinate courts from 19% to 25%. As of 2017, High Courts have 403 vacancies against a sanctioned strength of 1,079 judges, and subordinate courts have 5,676 vacancies against a sanctioned strength of 22,704 judges. As of 2017, among the major High Courts (with sanctioned strength over 10 judges), the highest proportion of vacancies was in Karnataka High Court at 60% (37 vacancies), followed by Calcutta High Court at 54% (39 vacancies). Similarly, in major subordinate courts (with sanctioned strength over 100 judges), the highest proportion of vacancies was in Bihar High Court at 46% (835 vacancies), followed by Uttar Pradesh High Court at 42% (1,348 vacancies).

Legislation

The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019: All you need to know

Anurag Vaishnav - December 23, 2019

Recently, the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 was introduced in Parliament. The Bill has been referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee for detailed examination, and the report is expected by the Budget Session, 2020. The Bill seeks to provide for protection of personal data of individuals, create a framework for processing such personal data, and establishes a Data Protection Authority for the purpose. In this blog, we provide a background to the 2019 Bill, and explain some of its key provisions.

What is personal data and data protection?

Data can be broadly classified into two types: personal and non-personal data. Personal data pertains to characteristics, traits or attributes of identity, which can be used to identify an individual. Non-personal data includes aggregated data through which individuals cannot be identified. For example, while an individual’s own location would constitute personal data; information derived from multiple drivers’ location, which is often used to analyse traffic flow, is non-personal data. Data protection refers to policies and procedures seeking to minimise intrusion into the privacy of an individual caused by collection and usage of their personal data.

Why was a Bill brought for personal data protection?

In August 2017, the Supreme Court held that privacy is a fundamental right, flowing from the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court also observed that privacy of personal data and facts is an essential aspect of the right to privacy. In July 2017, a Committee of Experts, chaired by Justice B. N. Srikrishna, was set up to examine various issues related to data protection in India. The Committee submitted its report, along with a Draft Personal Data Protection Bill, 2018 to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology in July 2018. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 states that the Bill is based on the recommendations of the report of the Expert Committee and the suggestions received from various stakeholders.

How is personal data regulated currently?

Currently, the usage and transfer of personal data of citizens is regulated by the Information Technology (IT) Rules, 2011, under the IT Act, 2000. The rules hold the companies using the data liable for compensating the individual, in case of any negligence in maintaining security standards while dealing with the data. The Expert Committee in its report, held that while the IT rules were a novel attempt at data protection at the time they were introduced, the pace of development of digital economy has shown its shortcomings.³ For instance, (i) the definition of sensitive personal data under the rules is narrow, and (ii) some of the provisions can be overridden by a contract. Further, the IT Act applies only to companies, not to the government.

What does the Personal Data Protection Bill provide?

The Bill regulates personal data related to individuals, and the processing, collection and storage of such data. Under the Bill, a data principal is an individual whose personal data is being processed. The entity or individual who decides the means and purposes of data processing is known as data fiduciary. The Bill governs the processing of personal data by both government and companies incorporated in India. It also governs foreign companies, if they deal with personal data of individuals in India.

Will individuals have rights over their data?

The Bill provides the data principal with certain rights with respect to their personal data. These include seeking confirmation on whether their personal data has been processed, seeking correction, completion or erasure of their data, seeking transfer of data to other fiduciaries, and restricting continuing disclosure of their personal data, if it is no longer necessary or if consent is withdrawn. Any processing of personal data can be done only on the basis of consent given by data principal.

Are there any restrictions on processing of an individual’s data?

The Bill also provides for certain obligations of data fiduciaries with respect to processing of personal data. Such processing should be subject to certain purpose, collection and storage limitations. For instance, personal data can be processed only for specific, clear and lawful purpose. Additionally, all data fiduciaries must undertake certain transparency and accountability measures such as implementing security safeguards and instituting grievance redressal mechanisms to address complaints of individuals. Certain fiduciaries would be notified as significant data fiduciaries (based on certain criteria such as volume of data processed and turnover of fiduciary). These fiduciaries must undertake additional accountability measures such as conducting a data protection impact assessment before conducting any processing of large scale sensitive personal data (includes financial data, biometric data, caste, religious or political beliefs).

What is the grievance redressal mechanism if the above restrictions are not followed?

To ensure compliance with the provisions of the Bill, and provide for further regulations with respect to processing of personal data of individuals, the Bill sets up a Data Protection Authority. The Authority will be comprised of members with expertise in fields such as data protection and information technology. Any individual, who is not satisfied with the grievance redressal by the data fiduciary can file a complaint to the Authority. Orders of the Authority can be appealed to an Appellate Tribunal. Appeals from the Tribunal will go to the Supreme Court.

Are there any exemptions to these safeguards for processing of personal data?

Processing of personal data is exempt from the provisions of the Bill in some cases. For example, the central government can exempt any of its agencies in the interest of security of state, public order, sovereignty and integrity of India, and friendly relations with foreign states. Processing of personal data is also exempted from provisions of the Bill for certain other purposes such as prevention, investigation, or prosecution of any offence, or research and journalistic purposes. Further, personal data of individuals can be processed without their consent in certain circumstances such as: (i) if required by the State for providing benefits to the individual, (ii) legal proceedings, (iii) to respond to a medical emergency.

Is the Bill different from the draft Bill suggested by the Expert Committee?

The Bill has made several changes from the draft Bill. For instance, the Bill has added a new class of significant data fiduciaries, as social media intermediaries. These will include intermediaries (with users above a notified threshold) which enable online interaction between users. Further, the Bill has expanded the scope of exemptions for the government, and additionally provided that the government may direct data fiduciaries to provide it with any non-personal or anonymised data for better targeting of services.

In a follow-up blog, we will provide a detailed comparison of the key provisions of this Bill with the Draft Personal Data Protection Bill 2018, released by the Justice B. N. Srikrishna Committee.

Home

MPs & MLAs

Legislatures

Parliament

State

Bills & Acts

Budgets

Policy

LAMP

Careers

Examining pendency of cases in the Judiciary

The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019: All you need to know

Recent Posts