In a significant move to address the daunting backlog of cases in the High Courts of India, the Supreme Court has suggested the appointment of ad hoc judges as necessary. This decision, announced on Tuesday, seeks to utilize Article 224A of the Constitution to appoint temporary judges who will work alongside permanent judges, specifically focusing on criminal appeals.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna, Justice B.R. Gavai, and Justice Suryakant, highlighted the urgent need for this measure due to the overwhelming number of pending criminal appeals. The bench revealed alarming statistics, such as a single new appeal in the Allahabad High Court taking an average of 35 years to resolve based on the number of cases received and disposed of between 2000 and 2021.
Currently, the Allahabad High Court alone has approximately 63,000 pending criminal appeals, with the Patna High Court at 20,000, the Karnataka High Court at 20,000, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court at 21,000. The justices emphasized that this crisis necessitates the appointment of ad hoc judges who would solely preside over criminal appeal cases.
The Supreme Court also indicated a need to revisit its 2021 decision which outlined guidelines for the appointment of temporary judges. The court has sought the opinion of Attorney General R. Venkataramani regarding the changes necessary to facilitate this process. The justices stressed that the use of Article 224A is not meant to replace permanent appointments but to aid in reducing the pendency, which has reached critical levels, especially in criminal matters.
Article 224A of the Indian Constitution allows for the reappointment of retired judges to the benches of High Courts for a duration of two or three years, provided there is consent from the retired judge. This provision aims to utilize the experience of retired judges to manage the workload without affecting the powers vested in the Chief Justices of the High Courts.
