Lok Sabha Question No. 2540 (UNSTARRED), answered on 2023-08-04
Subject: Pendency of Old Cases
Ministry: LAW AND JUSTICE
Asked by: Shardaben Anilbhai Patel, Mitesh Rameshbhai (Bakabhai) Patel

## GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

## LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO.2540 TO BE ANSWERED ON FRIDAY, THE 04 TH  AUGUST, 2023

## PENDENCY OF OLD CASES

## 2540. SHRIMATI SHARDABEN ANILBHAI PATEL:

## SHRI MITESH RAMESHBHAI PATEL (BAKABHAI):

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

- (a) the total number of criminal and civil cases pending in various courts for more than 50 years in the country;
- (b) whether the Supreme Court has given any directive to courts to dispose off these old cases within a time bound programme; and
- (c) if  so,  the  details  thereof  and  the  number  of  cases  disposed  off  after  the  said directive?

## ANSWER

## MINISTER OF STATE (INDEPENDENT CHARGE) OF THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE; MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS; AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF CULTURE

## (SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL)

- (a): The  Supreme  Court  of  India  has  informed  that  there  are  no  cases  pending  for more  than  50  years  as  per  data  retrieved  from  their  Integrated  Case  Management Information  System  (ICMIS).  In  case  of  High  Court  and  Subordinate  Courts,  as  per information  available  on  National  Judicial  Data  Grid(NJDG)  as  on  31 st July,  2023, number of pending civil and criminal cases is as under: -

| S.no.   | Name of Court                   | No. of cases pending for more than 50 years   | No. of cases pending for more than 50 years   | No. of cases pending for more than 50 years   |
|---------|---------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|         |                                 | Civil Cases                                   | Criminal Cases                                | Total                                         |
| 1       | High Court                      | 1062                                          | 1                                             | 1063                                          |
| 2       | District and Subordinate Courts | 787                                           | 347                                           | 1134                                          |

Source:- National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG)

(b) and (c): As per information provided by Supreme Court, directions are given by the Supreme Court to other courts on a regular basis through its various judgements/orders for timely disposal. For instance, in the case of Imtiyaz Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others [(2012) 2SCC 688], the Hon'ble Supreme Court noted that while it has no power of superintendence over the High Courts and that under the Constitution of India the High Courts are not subordinate to the Supreme Court, but as the last court and in exercise of its powers to do complete justice, the Supreme Court issued certain guidelines to the High Courts in respect of criminal cases. In these guidelines, the Supreme Court stressed  that  the  High  Courts  should  use  their  authority  sparingly  to  order  stay  of investigation pursuant to lodging of FIR or trial in deserving criminal cases. Such power should be exercised with due caution and circumspection keeping in mind  the responsibility to expeditiously dispose of the case. Once such power has been exercised, the  High  Courts  should  not  lose  sight  of  the  case  where  they  have  exercised  their extraordinary power of staying investigation and trial. Most importantly, the High Courts should ensure disposing of such proceedings as early as possible but preferably within six months from the date the stay order was issued.

In order to remedy the institutional problem of bail application not being heard and  to  dispose  such  applications  with  expedition,  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  matter of Aranab Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. [(2021) 2 SCC 427] urged the Chief Justices of the High Courts to use the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) as resource to monitor the pendency and disposal of cases. The Supreme Court further directed that each High Court in their administrative capacities should utilize the ICT  tools  which  are  placed  at  their  disposal  in  ensuring  that  access  to  justice  is democratized and remedy the problem of bail applications not being heard and disposed with expedition.

The Supreme Court has also constituted the Arrears Committee to formulate steps to reduce pendency of cases in the High Courts and District courts.

As  informed  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  India,  the  information  regarding  the number of cases disposed off after the directives of Supreme Court for timely disposal is not maintained by the Registry.

*******