Justice on Hold: India’s Allahabad High Court Crippled by Million-Case Backlog
The Allahabad High Court, one of India’s oldest and most respected courts, is facing a crisis of historic proportions. Known for its heritage and legacy — having once been graced by figures like Jawaharlal Nehru and future Supreme Court judges — the court now finds itself overwhelmed by a staggering backlog of more than one million cases.
From property disputes and criminal trials to family matters, citizens of Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state, are waiting decades for justice. For many, the dream of a fair and timely hearing has been replaced by endless adjournments, procedural hurdles, and crippling uncertainty.
A Justice System Stuck in Time
Take the story of Babu Ram Rajput, a 73-year-old retired government worker. In 1992, he bought a piece of land at auction. More than three decades later, his property case is still unresolved, stuck in the high court’s endless queue.
“I just hope my case is decided while I’m still alive,” Rajput says, echoing the despair of thousands who feel trapped in India’s broken judicial system.
Cases like his highlight how the Allahabad High Court mirrors the wider crisis of Indian courts, where vacancies, poor infrastructure, and a flood of new cases have left the system paralyzed.
Why So Many Delays?
The Allahabad High Court has a sanctioned strength of 160 judges, yet the number of sitting judges has rarely ever reached that figure. Vacancies often remain unfilled for years. This means each judge is forced to handle hundreds of cases daily — in some instances, over 1,000 cases a day.
With just five working hours, judges are left with less than a minute per case. In practice, this means many hearings are either rushed or not held at all. Urgent cases such as bail pleas or eviction stays often take priority, pushing older disputes even further down the list.
Senior lawyer Syed Farman Naqvi notes that courts often issue interim or temporary orders to handle urgent matters, but these cases are rarely resolved permanently. Instead, they sit unresolved while fresh cases keep flooding in.
Retired judge Amar Saran calls this the “cut-grass approach” — quick, standardised rulings to clear the surface, without digging deep into final judgments.
The Human Cost of Delay
The human toll of this backlog is severe. Earlier this year, the high court delivered a verdict in a rape and murder case that had been pending for more than 40 years. By the time the judgment came, four of the five convicted men had already died.
Litigants often travel long distances to Prayagraj, where the court is based. Some journey hundreds of kilometres, only to find their cases adjourned without hearing. For elderly citizens like Rajput, the strain is both physical and emotional.
“I’m over 70, and every trip is exhausting,” Rajput says. “Sometimes I travel all the way to court only to be told my case won’t be heard.”
Calls for Additional Benches
Lawyers have long demanded the creation of another bench of the Allahabad High Court in western Uttar Pradesh to ease the burden. Currently, the court operates with its main seat in Prayagraj and one bench in Lucknow.
A government commission recommended establishing more benches as far back as 1985, but the idea remains unimplemented. Earlier this year, the Uttar Pradesh government briefly revived the proposal but then withdrew it without explanation.
Experts argue that new benches could reduce travel burdens and distribute cases more evenly, but also caution that structural reforms are equally essential.
Appointment Bottlenecks
A key factor in the crisis is the slow and complex judicial appointment process. High court judges nominate candidates, who are then reviewed by the state and federal governments, the Chief Justice of India, and senior Supreme Court judges before final approval by the central government.
Former Chief Justice Govind Mathur highlights another challenge: chief justices are often appointed from outside the state and may not be familiar with local lawyers, making it harder to recommend suitable candidates.
Last year, despite nearly half the seats lying vacant, only one judge was recommended for appointment. This year saw some progress, with 40 new judges appointed, including 24 in a single week, but the backlog remains daunting. Even with a full bench, each judge would still face more than 7,000 pending cases.
Supreme Court Sounds the Alarm
The issue has now drawn sharp criticism from the Supreme Court of India. In January, the apex court described the situation as “worrisome,” warning that case listings at the Allahabad High Court had become unpredictable and that the system had “completely collapsed.”
Unpredictable hearings cause immense hardship. Many litigants spend money and time travelling only to find out their cases won’t be heard that day. For poorer families, the financial strain is devastating.
What Needs to Change?
Experts and legal scholars argue that solving the backlog requires a multi-pronged approach:
-
Filling judicial vacancies quickly and streamlining the appointment process.
-
Creating more high court benches to improve accessibility.
-
Investing in infrastructure and digitisation, including better case management systems.
-
Introducing uniform policies for hearings and case disposal, to avoid delays caused by inconsistent practices across judges.
Justice Govind Mathur stresses that India needs a national strategy for handling cases rather than leaving it to individual judges’ discretion.
Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied
For petitioners like Rajput, time is running out. After more than three decades, his biggest hope is not sweeping reform or systemic change, but simply a verdict within his lifetime.
The Allahabad High Court’s crisis serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of judicial paralysis. With over one million pending cases, justice in India’s largest state risks becoming a promise unfulfilled — a system where justice delayed is truly justice denied.