Mumbai: A candid remark by an Allahabad High Court judge about feeling “hungry, tired and physically incapacitated” after hearing a lengthy case has reignited discussions within the legal fraternity about the mounting workload judges face and the growing pendency of cases in India’s judiciary.
Justice Subhash Vidyarthi noted in his order that the hearing, which began at 4:15 p.m., concluded at 7:10 p.m., after regular court hours. “Since I am feeling hungry, tired and physically incapacitated to dictate the judgment, the judgment is reserved,” he recorded. The case, a Supreme Court-expedited matter, had reached the end of its six-month timeline set by the apex court.
Highlighting the workload before the bench, the court noted that on that day, there were 92 fresh matters, 101 regular matters, 39 fresh applications, and three matters listed in additional/unlisted lists I, II, and III. Only fresh cases up to serial number 29 could be heard.
The remark has triggered a wider debate on the pressures faced by the judiciary, with suggestions ranging from increasing the number of judges and holding courts on alternate Saturdays to reconsidering court vacation schedules.
Similar concerns have been raised at the Bombay High Court, where long cause lists often prevent the conclusion of all hearings despite judges working beyond official hours of 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Currently, the Bombay HC functions with 79 judges against a sanctioned strength of 94. Last week, Justice Ravindra Ghuge spoke candidly about judicial stress during a hearing, urging lawyers to respect the system even while arguing for clients. “If we carried everything home with us as baggage, by now we would have been in the hospital. The pressure is huge on this side,” he said.
Judicial workload had also been highlighted last year when Justice Madhav Jamdar attributed a six-month delay in delivering a judgment to overwhelming work. In an 85-page order, he explained that the delay in uploading a judgment, dictated on December 19, 2024, was due to heavy caseloads requiring late-night and weekend work. Judges often dictate orders in chambers until 11:30 p.m., read case papers at home until 2 a.m., and return early the next morning to continue work.
Former judges have echoed concerns about the judiciary’s workload. Former Bombay HC judge S.J. Kathawalla stressed the need for appointing more “competent judges” to ease the burden. “You cannot put the burden on a few judges,” he said, noting that growing case pendency makes strengthening judicial strength essential. He emphasised that a judge’s responsibilities extend beyond court hours, including writing judgments and preparing for the next day’s hearings.
Former Bombay HC judge Gautam Patel highlighted the importance of preserving institutional hours, cautioning that extended working hours affect not just judges but also staff and lawyers who must balance professional and family commitments. He also expressed reservations about Justice Vidyarthi recording personal conditions in judicial orders, saying, “It is very injudicial to put such a thing in an order. Such observations can instead be made during hearings.”
While some legal professionals have suggested scrapping court vacations, considered a colonial-era practice, former judges argue that breaks are essential for the physical and mental well-being of judges and court staff. “Vacations are required; otherwise, the judges will get affected,” Justice Kathawalla said.
The debate emerges amid a growing case backlog in India, with over five crore cases pending across various levels of the judiciary. Experts suggest that while increasing the number of judges could provide immediate relief, long-term solutions may require strengthening mediation and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to reduce pressure on courts.