National Judicial Policy: Towards a Unified and Efficient Justice System in India

National Judicial Policy: Towards a Unified and Efficient Justice System in India

India’s judiciary stands as one of the world’s most complex legal systems, revered for its constitutional depth yet challenged by an overwhelming volume of pending cases and uneven patterns of justice delivery. In November 2025, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant proposed the idea of a National Judicial Policy, a blueprint aimed at harmonizing the functioning of courts across the country. The proposal seeks to bring coherence to a system characterized by multiple High Courts, numerous Supreme Court benches, and varying judicial practices. The broader vision is to create a unified, accessible, and citizen-centric judicial ecosystem that strengthens public confidence, ensures uniform interpretations of law, and expands access to timely justice.

The Need for Greater Uniformity

One of the gravest concerns confronting India’s judicial landscape is the lack of consistent legal interpretations across different jurisdictions. High Courts often issue divergent rulings on similar questions of law, leaving citizens, businesses, and government entities grappling with uncertainty. When conflicting judgments arise, litigants are compelled to approach the Supreme Court, stretching timelines and adding financial burdens. Occasionally, even different benches of the Supreme Court may offer varying interim directions on overlapping matters, creating administrative confusion.

This inconsistency exacerbates an already staggering backlog of more than 5.4 crore cases across all levels of the judiciary. The absence of uniformity not only slows down decision-making but also undermines the predictability and credibility of the justice system. For marginalized communities, procedural variability translates into further disadvantage. Economic barriers, linguistic diversity, travel constraints, and uneven court infrastructure widen the access gap. A national judicial policy thus emerges as a framework designed to reinforce the constitutional promise of equality under Article 14 by reducing procedural disparities that hinder fair justice.

Reforms That Have Already Set the Stage

Several reform initiatives over the past decade have prepared the foundation for a nationwide judicial framework. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has grown considerably, particularly mediation and arbitration, offering faster and more collaborative avenues for resolving disputes. Mediation drives in family matters, commercial conflicts, and accident claims have successfully eased the burden on mainstream courts.

Digital transformation has been another game-changer. The adoption of e-filing, virtual courtrooms, digital transcription, and multilingual services has altered how justice is accessed and delivered. The pandemic accelerated the acceptance of technology, setting the stage for hybrid hearings and online case management systems. Arbitration centres have been equipped to meet global standards, enabling quicker settlement of commercial disputes. Improvements in physical infrastructure like court complexes, record rooms, and better staffing have enhanced the system’s overall functioning, although disparities between urban and rural courts continue to persist.

Constitutional Basis for a National Judicial Framework

The development of a unified policy must carefully align with the federal character of India’s Constitution. High Courts enjoy procedural autonomy under Articles 225 and 226, allowing them to evolve rules suited to regional needs. At the same time, Article 141 makes Supreme Court judgments binding across the nation, offering a natural pathway toward doctrinal uniformity.

A national judicial policy is not intended as a tool for central control. Rather, it aims to present guiding principles that courts may adopt voluntarily for enhanced coordination. During the proposal’s unveiling, the Chief Justice underscored that reforms must strengthen the right to speedy justice under Article 21 and promote legal aid as mandated by Article 39A. The broader objective is to view the judiciary as a cohesive ecosystem comprising courts, tribunals, digital services, legal aid bodies, and dispute-resolution mechanisms, all functioning harmoniously to uphold constitutional values.

Challenges that Require Careful Attention

Despite the compelling rationale, the journey toward a standardized judicial system is riddled with challenges. India’s linguistic and cultural diversity often complicates the introduction of uniform procedural norms. The debate over language use in courts whether proceedings should be held predominantly in English or regional languages which remains contentious. Any national policy must navigate these sensitivities without compromising inclusivity.

Judicial independence is another crucial factor. Reforms must avoid the perception of executive overreach, as seen earlier in debates surrounding tribunal reforms. Courts must feel assured that autonomy over adjudication and internal administration remains intact.

Infrastructure shortages pose an equally serious concern. Many courts continue to struggle with inadequate facilities, unstable internet, and insufficient administrative staff. Judicial vacancies in several High Courts hover near 50 percent, placing overwhelming pressure on existing judges. In lower courts, judges often handle upwards of 80–100 cases each day, making delays inevitable.

The digital divide also threatens to widen inequalities. While virtual hearings and e-filing offer convenience, many rural litigants lack reliable internet access or digital literacy. Resistance to technological change among lawyers and court staff, especially where e-filing becomes mandatory which signals the need for widespread training and awareness programmes.

Blueprint for Implementation

For a national judicial policy to succeed, it must be crafted collaboratively. The Supreme Court, High Courts, the Law Ministry, bar associations, and legal experts must come together to establish shared standards. Consultations can help ensure that reforms respect judicial independence while promoting uniformity.

Key components of the proposed framework may include standardized timelines for disposal of cases, rules for case categorization, common principles for scheduling hearings, and uniform documentation practices. Such measures would reduce bench-to-bench variation and improve predictability.

Pilot programmes can be introduced in selected states to test feasibility before nationwide implementation. Strengthening the lower judiciary must remain a core focus, given that it handles the bulk of litigation. Regular recruitment drives, enhanced training modules, and performance-based assessments can aid this effort.

Expanding digital tools, especially in regional languages will help bridge accessibility gaps. AI-driven translation systems, mobile-friendly court services, and digital kiosks in rural areas can make technology more inclusive. Monitoring mechanisms, backed by data, can track improvements in case disposal rates, transparency, and consistency.

Expanding Alternative Dispute Resolution and Judicial Coordination

ADR mechanisms form a vital pillar of the proposed reforms. Mediation, arbitration, conciliation, and lok adalats not only reduce pendency but also foster a less adversarial justice culture. Strengthening ADR institutions, offering specialized training, and increasing public awareness can significantly reduce the burden on formal courts.

Judicial coordination must also become systematic. Periodic dialogue between Supreme Court and High Court judges can help minimize conflicting interpretations of law. Joint workshops, jurisprudential exchanges, and structured consultations across courts can cultivate doctrinal coherence. International collaboration can further expose Indian courts to global best practices in technology, dispute resolution, and courtroom management.

Technological tools should be introduced with inclusivity in mind. Offline support systems, community legal aid clinics, and accessible help desks can assist those who remain on the periphery of digital transformation.

Conclusion

A National Judicial Policy represents a transformative opportunity for India’s justice system. By addressing inconsistencies across courts, modernizing infrastructure, and incorporating technology, it promises faster, fairer, and more predictable outcomes for citizens. If implemented with respect for diversity and judicial independence, the policy can significantly reduce pendency, enhance legal certainty, and strengthen constitutional values.

Ultimately, the success of this initiative will depend on collaborative governance, sustained investment, and an unwavering commitment to justice for all. A unified judicial framework, supported by ADR, advanced technology, and inclusive reforms which can help India realize the long-standing constitutional ideal of timely and accessible justice for every citizen.