The absence of lawyers is the single biggest reason behind delays in case disposal in Uttar Pradesh’s subordinate courts, which collectively grapple with a pendency of more than 1.19 crore litigations, nearly one-fourth of the country’s judicial backlog.
Event Context
The latest National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) data reveals that in around 27.01 lakh pending cases (civil and criminal combined), hearings could not proceed because counsel was unavailable, making it the largest identifiable cause of judicial delay in the state.
“No doubt, the non-appearance of lawyers during case hearings due to reasons like frequent strikes by them, is the biggest reason for judicial delays in subordinate courts in the state,” principal secretary (Law) Udaya Pratap Singh noted.
“Instructions against striking judicial work, taking frequent adjournments etc have been issued to lawyers from different levels from time to time to address this problem,” he said.
However, of the total around 1.19 crore pending cases, more than one crore are criminal cases.
Another 4.87 lakh cases are awaiting documents, including 2.66 lakh criminal and 2.21 lakh civil cases, indicating that delays in investigation document production and record transmission continue to slow judicial proceedings.
The NJDG data also reveals that 2.97 lakh cases have remained pending because proceedings have been stayed while 2.94 lakh cases are delayed as parties have lost interest or failed to pursue the matter. Frequent appeals account for another 1.79 lakh pending cases, suggesting that litigation at higher forums also affects trial court proceedings.
In civil cases, after the absence of counsel, the biggest reason is awaiting documents (2.21 lakh cases), followed by parties not interested (72,086), witnesses unavailable (67,767) and cases stated by various reasons ( 62,203)
The data also points to administrative hurdles. Around 43,447 cases are delayed because land records are not available, while 6,220 cases are awaiting court records. Smaller but significant categories include matters blocked by miscellaneous applications, stays by the high court or Supreme Court, and execution proceedings.
Team Analysis
Rakesh Pandey, president, High Court Bar Association (Allahabad), however, avoided commenting on the issue.
The second biggest factor is the non-availability of witnesses which has held up 8.99 lakh cases, followed by 7.39 lakh cases where the accused is absconding.
RB Sharma, a former district judge and advisor to the Union ministry of home affairs, stated that procedural bottlenecks, rather than judicial adjudication alone, are significantly contributing to the mounting pendency in district courts.
He said the non-availability of the accused during trial was a major cause of non-disposal of lakhs of criminal cases in courts. He added that the new law, however, seeks to dispose of cases in the absence of the accused too.
“Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 courts can conduct a trial in absentia against an absconding accused. If a proclaimed offender evades appearance for 90 days, the trial may proceed without them to prevent fugitives from exploiting legal delays,” he said.
A breakdown of the data indicates that the problem is overwhelmingly concentrated in criminal cases. Of the 27.01 lakh cases delayed due to absence of counsel, 23.55 lakh are criminal cases while only 3.46 lakh are civil cases. Similarly, witness-related delays account for 8.32 lakh criminal cases, compared to 67,767 civil cases.
