CJI Surya Kant calls for identifying cases clogging system, says personal attacks on judges should stop

Signalling an uncompromising reform agenda, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Friday declared a decisive push to cut judicial pendency, placing mediation at the centre of court functioning and promising structural fixes for cases that have choked the justice system for decades. Even as he brushed aside social media trolling of judges, the CJI warned that personal attacks threaten the morale of the lower judiciary and must stop.

Justice Kant said his tenure would focus on identifying and unclogging categories of cases that have paralysed courts for years.

The CJI was in Goa as the chief guest at the conference and also led a 2-km walkathon to generate public awareness about mediation as an effective alternative dispute resolution mechanism.

“Pendency is not an abstract number. It represents real human suffering,” Justice Kant said, underlining that his administration would take the fight against pendency to its logical conclusion.

Mediation as cornerstone of reform

Placing mediation at the centre of judicial reform, the CJI said consensual dispute resolution was no longer optional but essential for the survival of the justice delivery system. He noted that a large volume of litigation did not require prolonged adversarial trials and could be resolved through dialogue-driven processes.

“Mediation offers dignity, speed and finality. We want to institutionalise it, normalise it and make it the first instinct rather than the last resort,” he said, adding that judicial time must be reserved for cases involving complex constitutional or legal questions.

“Mediation is being accepted as successful and cost-effective. It is a win-win situation for both parties as it is a settlement,” Justice Kant said, stressing that the process is entirely voluntary and party-driven. “No mediator imposes anything. It is only what the parties desire and agree to,” he added.

He noted that growing awareness had already yielded tangible results, with high courts and district courts increasingly identifying suitable cases for mediation. “Once people are sensitised, they become conscious of the fact that mediation is a successful tool. This leads to good results, and this has actually happened,” he said.

Calling mediation an ongoing and evolving process, the CJI emphasised that it was not limited to pending cases alone. “It will continue for old cases, fresh cases, and even at the pre-litigation stage before a dispute reaches the court,” Justice Kant said.

Identifying cases clogging the system

Justice Kant said the Supreme Court, in coordination with high courts, would identify categories of disputes that disproportionately clog dockets and design targeted solutions for them. Among the top priorities, he flagged pending cheque dishonour cases, land acquisition disputes and taxation matters.

“These categories account for an enormous chunk of litigation. If we address them structurally, the ripple effect across the judiciary will be transformative,” he said.

Cheque bounce cases alone run into lakhs across trial courts and appellate forums, while land acquisition and tax disputes often remain unresolved for decades, entangling citizens, businesses and the state in endless litigation.

Big reforms in Supreme Court functioning

Signalling significant administrative changes, the CJI said big reforms were already underway in the functioning of the Supreme Court. One of the most visible changes, he said, was the introduction of greater predictability in listing of matters.

“For the first time, lawyers broadly know when their matter is likely to come up. This predictability brings discipline, reduces anxiety and improves efficiency,” Justice Kant said, calling it a small but critical step towards systemic rationalisation.

On social media attacks and trolling of judges

Responding to a question on social media attacks on judges particularly in the context of him being trolled over his earlier comments on Rohingya refugees, the CJI struck a measured but firm note.

“We are not bothered about trolling,” he said. “Judges are trained judicial minds. Constructive criticism of judgments is always welcome and healthy in a democracy.”

However, he drew a clear line between criticism of judicial reasoning and personal attacks on judges. “Personal attacks should be avoided. They do not serve any democratic purpose,” Justice Kant said.

Importantly, he cautioned that while Supreme Court and high court judges may be resilient to online abuse, such attacks have a damaging impact lower down the judicial hierarchy.

“Judges of the Supreme Court and high courts are tough, trained minds and are not easily demoralised. But constant personal attacks can deeply demoralise judges in the subordinate judiciary,” he warned, calling for greater public responsibility in digital discourse.