The Indian legal system is notorious for its complexities and delays. It is frequently chastised for the length of time it takes to resolve matters and for the backlog of cases in the courts. One explanation for this is the large number of cases filed in High Courts and the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court is the country’s highest court, and as such, it hears appeals from the High Courts as well as cases involving constitutional issues. As a result, the Supreme Court has become overcrowded with a high number of cases, resulting in severe delays in the delivery of justice. To remedy this issue, Various committees have suggested the establishment of a National Court of Appeal, which would serve as the final court of appeal for appeals from decisions made by High Courts and tribunals within their territory.

What is the National Court of appeal?

• The National Court of Appeal is a judicial body which would have regional benches in Chennai, Mumbai, and Kolkata.
• The court is designed to be the final court of justice for appeals from decisions made by the High Courts and tribunals within their region in matters related to civil, criminal, labour, and revenue issues.
• The Supreme Court of India, located in Delhi, would only hear matters related to constitutional law and public law under this system.

Need for National court of appeal

• High Appellate Load: The Supreme Court is India’s highest court of appeal for both civil and criminal cases, with the authority to override any other court or tribunal in the country, with the exception of armed forces tribunals. Despite this, an increase in the number of appeals has contributed to the already huge number of pending cases, resulting in a backlog.
• Impact on Justice Delivery: The high number of cases pending and the backlog of appeals can have a negative impact on both the timely delivery of justice and the Supreme Court’s capacity to efficiently address critical legal issues. This can cause delays in the settlement of crucial issues and undermine public trust in the legal system.
• Increase in Public Interest Litigation: In recent years, the number of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court has increased. PILs are a type of litigation that can be brought by individuals, groups, or simply as a letter to the Chief Justice of India. The increase in PILs contributes to the vast number of ongoing cases in the Supreme Court, emphasising the need for an appeals court.

Advantages of National court of appeal

• Improving Access to Justice: The formation of an appeals court would alleviate the difficulties which are faced by  persons living in distant and backward regions. This will ensure that justice is available to all people, regardless of where they live. The exorbitant costs of hiring senior lawyers will be cut as well, making it easier for citizens to use the courts.
• Optimising the Supreme Court: Having a court of appeals to hear cases will relieve the Supreme Court of its workload. This will allow the Supreme Court to focus on its basic functions, such as interpreting constitutional law, referring cases, and deciding death penalty cases. The process will be expedited, saving both litigants and the courts a significant amount of time and money.
• Case Sieve: The proposed court of appeals would act as a mechanism for sieving cases and settling any unsettled areas of law. This will not only dispose of individual cases, but also provide clarity and set precedents for future cases in similar areas of law. This will lead to more efficient and effective use of the courts’ resources.
• Low Proportion of Constitutional Matters: The Supreme Court’s broad jurisdiction encompasses original, appellate, and advisory cases, although according to a 2014 assessment, only a small proportion of its final judgements dealt with constitutional issues. This emphasises the importance of the court focusing on more major and complicated matters, as well as the need for a separate court to handle a high number of appeals.
• Increased public trust in the legal system: The Supreme Court’s emphasis on critical issues can boost public trust in the legal system by demonstrating a proactive effort to resolve serious conflicts in a timely and efficient manner. This can boost public trust in the court’s ability to provide justice and provide fair and unbiased dispute resolution.
• Better Jurisprudence: With the reduced workload of the Supreme Court, the justices will have more time to read and write better decisions. This will result in improved jurisprudence, with rulings that are well thought out and based on thorough analysis. This will help to ensure that the legal system is fair and impartial, and that all citizens receive equal treatment under the law.

Challenges of National court of appeal

• Increases financial burden: The establishment of the National Court of Appeals (NCA) will place further financial strain on both the government budget and litigants’ bills. This may be viewed as an additional burden on taxpayers and those interested in litigation. Furthermore, the increasing fees will make access to justice even more difficult for people who are already struggling.
• No decrease in the number of cases: The establishment of NCA will not reduce the volume of litigation since it would simply add another layer of decision-making. The issue is with the lower courts, not with the Supreme Court. Despite the implementation of NCA, the Supreme Court’s backlog of cases is projected to stay similar, as lower courts will continue to create a huge number of cases that must be processed.
• Constitutional issues: The establishment of the NCA presents constitutional concerns because it would necessitate a modification to Article 130 of the Constitution, which would significantly alter the organisation of the Supreme Court. This could lead to a diminution in the Supreme Court’s independence as well as the judiciary’s power in the country.
• Limiting of Supreme Court powers: There are concerns that the establishment of the NCA is an attempt by other state institutions to limit the Supreme Court’s constitutional powers. This could lead to a loss in the Supreme Court’s independence and a reduction in its abilities to protect citizens’ rights and enforce the Constitution.
• Unconstitutional: The creation of the National Court of Appeals (NCA) may be considered unconstitutional because it substantially alters the conventional structure of the Supreme Court in hearing appeals. This departure from the traditional method may result in less accountability and openness in the administration of justice, compromising the Indian judiciary’s fundamental values.
• Reduced talent pool of judges: The establishment of the NCA may result in a diminution in the talent pool of Supreme Court justices. This could reduce the quality of justice as well as the knowledge and experience of the judges’ hearing cases. This would have a detrimental impact on the Indian justice system since it would lower the quality of the judiciary and judges’ knowledge.
• Boon Only for lawyers: It would only benefit lawyers, who would be able to argue their claims in two different courts. This would result in more billable hours and a larger earning potential. However, it is possible that it may not bring any actual benefits to litigants, who will still have to go through the same time-consuming and costly process.
• Difficulty in administration: The installation of NCA would complicate the administration of courts and rosters. The establishment of another court layer would necessitate an increase in resources, staff, and facilities, putting further burden on the government budget and the Indian justice system. The difficulties in administration may result in inefficiencies and a slowing of the administration of justice, which would be detrimental to litigants and the public.

Supreme court’s position on National Court of Appeal

• Recommendation for NCA: The Supreme Court recommended the establishment of the National Court of Appeal (NCA) with regional Benches in Chennai, Mumbai and Kolkata in 1986. The idea behind the NCA was to ease the burden of the Supreme Court and avoid hardship to litigants who had to travel to Delhi to fight their cases.
• Opposition by Chief Justices of India: Subsequent Chief Justices of India were not in favour of bifurcation of judicial powers and the formation of regional benches of the apex court.
• Change in outlook: The outlook changed in February 2016 when the Supreme Court admitted a petition by Chennai lawyer V. Vasanth Kumar for setting up an NCA.

Government’s Position on National Court of Appeal

• Objection from former Chief Justices of India: The Law Ministry cited that past Chief Justices of India’s opposition to the idea of an NCA or regional benches to the Supreme Court as a rationale for rejecting the proposal.
• Changes to the Supreme Court’s constitution: The Attorney-General indicated that the establishment of an NCA would result in a full change to the Supreme Court’s constitution, which was another reason for rejecting the idea.

Way forward

• Improving the existing judicial hierarchy: Before proposing a new layer of the judiciary, it is important to consider strengthening the existing judicial hierarchy to tackle the challenges that come with the increasing caseload. A more robust subordinate judiciary is needed to support the justice delivery system, instead of the current frail infrastructure.
• Policy decision: The establishment of a National Court of Appeal is a policy decision, and the court cannot give direction to the central government to establish NCA as it would be seen as the court giving direction to the government to enact a law.
• Resolving pending cases: According to data provided by the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), it is expected to take more than 30 years to resolve criminal cases in India’s lower courts, while civil matters are unlikely to be fully resolved. A more robust and efficient lower judiciary is necessary to tackle this issue.

The formation of the National Court of Appeal has the potential to drastically reduce the Supreme Court of India’s workload, allowing it to devote more time to constitutionally significant matters. By handling regional appeals in a more timely and effective manner, the National Court of Appeal may play a significant role in ensuring that all Indian residents have access to justice.