India’s judiciary, once hailed as the guardian of constitutional rights and the last bastion against executive excess, now finds itself at the centre of a storm. The President of India’s recent, unprecedented rebuke of the Supreme Court-accompanied by a detailed questionnaire on judicial conduct, transparency, and accountability-has exposed the deep fissures in the country’s legal system. With more than five crore (50 million) cases pending across all levels of courts, allegations of corruption, nepotism, and opacity, and a growing perception that the judiciary is responsible for much of India’s underdevelopment, the time for introspection and reform is overdue.

This article unpacks the President’s intervention, analyses the Supreme Court’s authority and its transgressions, details the scale of the crisis through data and case studies, and explains why a dysfunctional judiciary is now a major impediment to India’s progress.

The President’s Questionnaire: A Historic Challenge to Judicial Authority

The President’s office, in a move that sent shockwaves through the legal and political establishment, recently sent a comprehensive questionnaire to the Supreme Court of India. The document reportedly sought explanations on several fronts:

Judicial Accountability: What mechanisms exist for holding sitting judges accountable for misconduct or corruption?
Transparency: Why is the asset declaration by judges not made public, and why is the roster system for case allocation so opaque?
Case Pendency: What concrete steps are being taken to address the mounting backlog of cases, and why have previous reforms failed?
Corruption and Nepotism: How many complaints of judicial corruption have been received, and what action has been taken?
Public Trust: What is being done to restore public faith in the judiciary in the face of mounting scandals and declining standards?

The President’s intervention is significant because, under the Constitution, the judiciary is expected to function independently of the executive. However, when the highest court is seen as failing in its duty to deliver timely and impartial justice, the head of state’s moral authority to seek answers becomes unassailable.

Supreme Court’s Authority: Constitutional Mandate and Transgressions

The Supreme Court of India is vested with vast powers under the Constitution: judicial review, interpretation of laws, and the protection of fundamental rights. Over the decades, it has played a transformative role in shaping India’s democracy. However, the same authority has often been stretched beyond its intended limits.

Judicial Overreach

The Court has, at times, issued directions or taken up matters that fall squarely within the executive or legislative domain, blurring the separation of powers.
The practice of “judicial activism” has given way to what many now see as “judicial overreach,” where the Court’s interventions are not always rooted in law or necessity but in a desire to govern.
This has led to friction with both Parliament and the executive, with critics arguing that the judiciary is undermining democratic accountability.

Opaque Appointments and Transfers

The collegium system, through which judges are appointed and transferred, operates with minimal transparency or external oversight.
Allegations of nepotism and favouritism abound, with little recourse for aggrieved parties or the public.
The Supreme Court has fiercely resisted any attempt by Parliament or the executive to introduce external checks, citing judicial independence.

The Crisis of Pendency: Data and Trends

India’s courts are drowning in a sea of pending cases. The numbers are staggering and growing.

Supreme Court Pendency

As of March 2025, the Supreme Court had 81,394 pending cases.
The number has steadily increased over the last five years, from 61,142 in March 2020 to over 81,500 in March 2025.
In January 2025, the Court recorded 82,445 pending cases, a significant increase from 58,029 in January 2019.
Even with periods of increased disposals, the inflow of new cases consistently outpaces the rate at which old cases are resolved.

All-India Pendency

Across all courts-Supreme Court, High Courts, and subordinate courts-pending cases have crossed 52 million (5.2 crore) as of 2025.
Of these, over 180,000 cases have been pending for more than 30 years.
Every month, lakhs of new cases are instituted, overwhelming an already burdened system.

Consequences

Justice delayed is justice denied: victims, accused, and litigants wait years, sometimes decades, for resolution.
Economic activity is hampered as commercial disputes, land acquisition cases, and contract enforcement languish in courts.
The sheer volume of pending cases erodes public trust and leads to a culture of impunity.

Why the Judiciary Is Responsible for Underdevelopment

A dysfunctional judiciary is not just a legal problem-it is a developmental disaster.

Economic Impact

Investors, both domestic and foreign, cite India’s slow and unpredictable legal system as a major deterrent to doing business.
Disputes over contracts, property, and regulatory approvals can drag on for years, discouraging entrepreneurship and innovation.
The World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business rankings have consistently penalised India for weak contract enforcement and judicial delays.

Social Consequences

Ordinary citizens, especially the poor and marginalised, are denied timely justice, perpetuating cycles of poverty and exploitation.
Women, minorities, and vulnerable groups face additional hurdles in accessing the courts and securing their rights.
The backlog of criminal cases means that many undertrials languish in jail for years without conviction or acquittal.

Governance and Rule of Law

The inability to enforce laws quickly and fairly undermines the rule of law and emboldens wrongdoers.
Corruption and arbitrariness thrive in a system where delays and adjournments can be bought or manipulated.
The judiciary’s failure to police itself and ensure accountability has led to a perception of impunity among judges.

Corruption in the Judiciary: Scandals and Systemic Failures

Corruption in India’s judiciary is not merely anecdotal; it is systemic and well-documented.

High-Profile Scandals

The 2011 impeachment of Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court for misappropriation of funds.
The 2009 “cash-at-judge’s-door” scandal involving Justice Nirmal Yadav of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The 2019 CBI investigation against Justice Narain Shukla of the Allahabad High Court for allegedly favouring a medical college in exchange for illegal gratification.
The 2025 cash scandal at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma, with crores of rupees allegedly recovered after a fire.

Systemic Issues

Transparency International’s 2013 Global Corruption Barometer found that 45% of Indian households viewed the judiciary as corrupt.
The in-house mechanism for investigating judicial misconduct is opaque and ineffective, with no external oversight.
Judges facing serious allegations often resign before impeachment or prosecution, retaining their post-retirement benefits.
The requirement for the Chief Justice’s approval before any FIR against a judge creates a shield of virtual immunity.

Complaints and Accountability

In 2021 alone, there were 1,631 complaints of corruption against judicial officers.
Out of more than 1,100 judges in the High Courts and Supreme Court, only 98 have publicly disclosed their assets as of March 2025.
The Supreme Court has stayed attempts by the Lokpal to assert jurisdiction over sitting High Court judges, resisting external scrutiny.

The Judiciary’s Opacity: A Culture of Secrecy

The roster system for case allocation is controlled solely by the Chief Justice, with little transparency or explanation.
Asset declarations by judges are not made public, and there is no independent audit of their finances.
Disciplinary proceedings and internal inquiries are conducted behind closed doors, with outcomes rarely disclosed.
Even basic transparency measures, such as the Right to Information Act, are resisted by the judiciary.

The President’s Intervention: A Necessary Wake-Up Call

The President’s questionnaire and public statements have put the judiciary on notice. The questions raised are not just about individual scandals but about the systemic rot that threatens the very foundation of Indian democracy.

Key Demands in the Questionnaire

Public disclosure of judges’ assets and financial interests.
Transparent and accountable procedures for case allocation and judicial appointments.
Regular publication of data on case pendency, disposal rates, and reasons for delays.
Independent oversight of judicial conduct and complaints, with external participation.
Concrete plans to clear the backlog and modernise court infrastructure.

Why the Judiciary Must Reform-Now

India’s future as a democracy and a global economic power depends on the credibility and effectiveness of its judiciary. Without urgent reforms, the courts risk becoming irrelevant to the common citizen and a drag on the nation’s progress.

Reform Priorities

Digitisation and Case Management: Modern technology must be deployed to streamline filings, hearings, and case tracking.
Expansion of Fast-Track Courts: Special courts for commercial, criminal, and family cases can help clear the backlog.
Transparent Appointments: The collegium system must be opened up to external scrutiny, with clear criteria and public input.
Asset Declarations and Audits: Judges must be required to declare assets publicly and be subject to independent audits.
Accountability Mechanisms: An independent judicial complaints authority, with powers to investigate and sanction, is essential.

Lessons from Global Best Practices

Many democracies have independent judicial commissions overseeing appointments, discipline, and complaints.
Public asset disclosures and regular audits are standard in advanced legal systems.
The use of technology, from e-filing to virtual hearings, has dramatically reduced pendency in countries like Singapore and the UK.
External oversight and citizen participation in judicial governance are key to restoring public trust.

Conclusion: The Judiciary at a Crossroads

The President’s bold intervention has exposed the fault lines in India’s highest court. The Supreme Court, once the conscience-keeper of the nation, now stands accused of overreach, opacity, and complicity in the very corruption it is meant to check. With crores of cases pending, scandals mounting, and public faith eroding, the judiciary must choose: embrace transparency and reform, or risk irrelevance and further underdevelopment.

India’s aspirations for growth, justice, and global leadership cannot be realised without a judiciary that is swift, honest, and accountable. The time for half-measures is over. The President’s challenge is a clarion call for the judiciary to reclaim its moral authority and deliver on the promise of justice for all.