Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty, which includes the right to live with dignity, freedom, and equal protection under the law. However, the delay in delivering justice often leads to a situation where the essence of this right is compromised. When justice is not delivered in a timely manner, the impact on individuals and society is deeply damaging, as the delay itself often amounts to a denial.

India follows a three-tier judicial structure—District Courts at the base, followed by the High Courts, and the Supreme Court at the top. These institutions are interconnected and are expected to provide accessible and timely justice to citizens. However, the Indian judiciary is currently burdened with an overwhelming number of pending cases. As per the National Judicial Data Grid, more than 5 crore cases are pending across all courts, with over 70,000 in the Supreme Court alone. These numbers reflect the scale of the crisis and the urgent need for systemic reform.

A recent example that raises serious concerns about justice delivery is the wrongful conviction of Vishnu Tiwari, who spent 20 years in jail before being declared innocent by the Allahabad High Court in 2021. This tragic delay not only robbed him of two decades of his life but also exposed flaws in investigation and trial procedures. Such incidents question the reliability of our legal institutions and shake public confidence.

Several structural and procedural issues contribute to these delays. First, the shortage of judges is a major concern. India has only around 21 judges per million people, far below the recommended ratio of 50 per million. Second, procedural delays, multiple adjournments, and a lack of modern case management systems lead to inefficiency. Third, poor coordination between the police and judiciary further slows the process, particularly in criminal cases.

However, where there are problems, there are also potential solutions. The Supreme Court has already initiated reforms like e-filing systems and virtual hearings, which became prominent during the COVID-19 pandemic. These have the potential to reduce logistical burdens, especially for citizens in remote areas.

A second solution could be the establishment of regional benches of the Supreme Court, especially in southern and northeastern India. This would reduce the geographical barriers and ease the pressure on the main bench in New Delhi. This idea has been supported in Law Commission reports and by legal scholars, though it is yet to be implemented.

Third, reforms in the investigation process are essential. Police training, forensic facilities, and accountability must be improved to avoid wrongful arrests and delays in filing charge sheets. Strict timelines, similar to those under the POCSO Act and Fast Track Courts, should be extended to other categories of cases.

To conclude, the Indian Constitution guarantees rights to all citizens, but these rights remain merely theoretical if the justice system fails to deliver on time. As the Supreme Court rightly observed in Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979), the right to a speedy trial is an essential part of the right to life. Strengthening judicial infrastructure, filling vacancies, modernizing procedures, and decentralizing institutions are vital steps to ensure that justice is not just delivered, but delivered in time. Only then can the ideal of "Justice Delayed is Justice Denied" be truly defeated.