It is a well-known fact that
there are an enormous number of cases that have been filed before the Indian
courts. It is an equally well-known fact that many of these cases have been
pending before the said courts for several years. Talks of pendency always seem to centre on
these huge, and more often than not, unfathomable numbers. There is however, a
third, and lesser discussed aspect to this pressing issue of pendency – the
subject matter of these multiple and much delayed cases.
That is the very question we are
asking in this blog post– what are the kinds of cases that the courts are working
on? To answer this question, we’ve chosen to look at a single High Court from
our database - the High Court of Karnataka.
Among the information we collect
for each case record we have in our database, we have case types. The table
below illustrates the distribution of case types for 2,34,795 case records that
we have for the High Court of Karnataka. In addition, the table compares the
duration of pendency across these various case types. So without further ado, let’s
look at what the High Court of Karnataka is working on.
CASE TYPE
|
CASE TYPE FULL FORM
|
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL CASES
|
PENDENCY IN DAYS
|
WP
|
Writ Petition
|
30%
|
866
|
MFA
|
Miscellaneous First Appeal
|
29%
|
1,168
|
CRL.P
|
Criminal Petition
|
11%
|
775
|
RSA
|
Regular Second Appeal
|
7%
|
1,514
|
RFA
|
Regular First Appeal
|
5%
|
1,553
|
CRL.A
|
Criminal Appeal
|
3%
|
1,270
|
CRL.RP
|
Criminal Revision Petition
|
2%
|
1,025
|
WA
|
Writ Appeal
|
2%
|
991
|
COP
|
Company Petition
|
1%
|
2,179
|
ITA
|
Income Tax Appeal
|
1%
|
1,408
|
MSA
|
Miscellaneous Second Appeal
|
1%
|
1,015
|
CRP
|
Civil Revision Petition
|
1%
|
935
|
CA
|
Company Application
|
1%
|
926
|
RP
|
Review Petition
|
1%
|
902
|
CMP
|
Civil Miscellaneous Petition
|
1%
|
806
|
CP
|
Civil Petition
|
1%
|
782
|
CCC
|
Civil Contempt Petition
|
1%
|
633
|
MFA.CROB
|
Miscellaneous First Appeal Cross Objection
|
0.50%
|
1,007
|
RPFC
|
Review Petition Family Court
|
0.50%
|
745
|
Others
|
1%
|
1043
|
There are multiple inferences that
can be read from this table, but right off the bat, a couple jump out.
The first natural question of
course, is, what kind of cases are most prevalent? At the top of the list, with
a 30 per cent majority are Writ Petitions (WP). To quickly explain, writ
petitions are cases filed by persons whose fundamental right have been violated
by the state. So, in number speak, one third of the cases are those filed
against the government or government agencies.
For an even larger, but not quite
so obvious statistic, consider this: in the second column, just look for the
word ‘appeal’ and then add up the percentages next to each of those case types.
Together, seven case types – various kinds of appeals – account for 48 per cent
of the total. An appeal is in essence a request to a higher court to review and
revise the decision of a lower court. That means for about half these cases
pending before the High Court, judicial time has already been spent, and this is the second time before a court.
The table also throws up possible
correlations (or lack of) between the number of cases and average pendency. According
to the data, Company Petitions (COP) have the longest average pendency of 2,179
days, about six years. However, they make up only 1 per cent of the sample. Whereas,
Writ Petitions (WP), which make up one third of the total, are pending on
average for the relatively shorter time period of 866 days or 2 years and 4
months.
The paragraphs above contain just
a few of my thoughts as I created and looked at this table. They are but a tiny
speck in the pool of questions that can be asked and the analyses that can be
carried out using this data. Ultimately, what this table clearly illustrates is
that understanding the composition of judicial workload is a much needed step
towards building sustainable solutions to pendency.
Do you have any thoughts, ideas
or questions about this data? If you do, let us know by leaving a comment
below. We are eager to hear from you.
Nice article, which you have shared here. Your article is very informative and I liked your way to express your views in this post. The article you have shared here is very informative and the points you have mentioned are very helpful. Thanks for sharing this article here. Judgements of Supreme Court
ReplyDeleteأنا ممتن جدًا لك لتقاسم هذه المعرفة الضرورية. هذه المعلومات مفيدة جدا للجميع. لذا يرجى دائما مشاركة هذا النوع من المعلومات. شكرا مرة أخرى لتقاسمها. الرجاء زيارة موقعنا على شبكة الإنترنت مكتب ترجمة معتمد بمدينة نصر
ReplyDeleteThanks for the great post you posted. I like the way you describe the unique content. The points you raise are valid and reasonable. I am a tech support expert telling you about.
ReplyDeleterobinhood wallet
Robinhood Crypto Wallet
MetaMask Login
I just stumbled upon your site, and I've been enjoying your articles.
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff! It covers very useful information. the posts are great.
Thank you for sharing such useful information.مكتب ترجمة معتمد
Thank you for your great blog and your post is very interesting. Keep it up!!!
ReplyDeletecontract dispute settlement agreement
protective order virginia
Very good impressive post!!!.I need more post like that.
ReplyDeletequiebras cerca de mí
Very good impressive post!!!.I need more post like that
ReplyDeleteabogados de bancarrota en roanoke virginia