The Indian Judicial System is a Drag on the Economic Growth....

The inefficiency of India's judicial system acts as a persistent drag on the nation's economic potential, resulting in substantial losses in Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The chronic delays in dispute resolution, estimated to cost the country approximately 1.5% of its GDP annually, impede investment, reduce business confidence, and hinder overall economic development.The inefficiency of the Indian judicial system manifests primarily through massive pendency of cases. As of late 2024, there are over 45 million cases pending across all court levels. The Allahabad High Court, for example, is projected to take approximately 300 years to clear its backlog at the current pace, a stark illustration of the systemic gridlock.

This procedural logjam has profound economic consequences:

Deterred Investment: Businesses, both domestic and international, are hesitant to invest when contractual enforcement and dispute resolution cannot be guaranteed within a reasonable timeframe. The World Bank's "Enforcing Contracts" indicator, within its Ease of Doing Business reports, consistently highlights India's poor performance in this area, noting that resolving a commercial dispute can take years, tying up capital and resources.

Locked-up Capital: Disputes over land, property rights, and debt recovery trap trillions of rupees in assets. An estimated ₹10 lakh crore (approximately $120 billion USD) is currently locked up in various litigations, preventing the productive use of this capital in the economy.

Increased Transaction Costs: Businesses incur high legal fees and opportunity costs waiting for resolutions, effectively an indirect tax on economic activity. The uncertainty associated with legal outcomes makes long-term planning difficult.

Collectively, these factors lead to a consensus estimate among economists and institutions like the NITI Aayog and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) that judicial inefficiency reduces India's GDP growth by at least 1-1.5% annually.

Assigning Responsibility: Beyond the Government

While the government holds significant responsibility for budgetary allocations and judicial appointments, assigning sole blame to the executive branch is an oversimplification. The primary responsibility for the day-to-day inefficiency lies with a complex interplay of factors within the judicial system itself, and specifically, the Judiciary's own administration and procedural rigidity.

Here is a breakdown of key responsibilities:

1. The Judiciary (Administration and Bar Councils):

The judiciary is largely self-governing in its internal administration, rules of procedure, and case management. The failure to adopt modern case management techniques, the reluctance to mandate continuous working hours, frequent adjournments, and insufficient use of technology are internal administrative failures. The Supreme Court and High Courts have the power to create and enforce rules to expedite trials but have historically been slow to implement radical reforms.

2. The Legal Fraternity (Lawyers and Bar Associations):

A significant portion of the blame rests with certain sections of the legal fraternity. The practice of seeking excessive adjournments, often used as a dilatory tactic by lawyers, is a major contributor to delays. Bar Councils and associations have largely failed to self-regulate this behavior effectively.

3. The Executive and Legislature (Government):

The government is responsible for ensuring sufficient funding and infrastructure. While the budget allocation for the judiciary has historically been low (around 0.2% of GDP), the judiciary itself has also been slow in utilizing allocated funds efficiently or demanding radical infrastructural overhauls.

While the government provides the necessary resources, the judiciary's own administrative structure and procedural inertia are the most responsible non-government factors for the pervasive inefficiency. The lack of accountability for delays within the system itself is a primary impediment to reform. The inefficiency of India's judicial system is not merely a legal or social issue; it is a significant economic constraint. Addressing the estimated 1.5% annual GDP loss requires more than incremental changes. It demands a collaborative effort where the judiciary embraces modernization, implements stringent case management protocols, and holds itself accountable for timely justice delivery. Only through fundamental reform can India unlock its full economic potential and ensure that justice is not just a constitutional right but a tangible reality.