The Indian judicial system is famous for delay in judicial procedure and along with that too the long time judicial proceedings is also in news these days. The main purpose of the judicial proceeding is to fasten the legal procedure so that the justice shall not be delayed nor denied in any circumstances.The main objective of judgment writing is to convey the interpretation of the law as clearly as possible, not only to the parties in the litigation, but also to the people at large. Basically , a judgement is like a footstep of other following case laws. So with the lengthy judgement justice is also delayed in the due process of law. It is basically the need of hour to write short and precise judgement that should be easy to be understood by the litigant easily.

As we can see, the verdict in the landmark case of  Kesavananda Bharati  (1973) that propounded the Basic Structure Doctrine contained 700 pages and was difficult to comprehend. The SP Gupta case (1981) that had roughly 830 pages. However, during the last few years, the Supreme Court of India has been trying hard to break its own record of writing the longest judgment. It seems the judges have taken it up as a new competition to make new records in terms of writing long judgments. Likewise in few recent cases where we can see see that a trend of long judgement has taken its place like


  • National judicial appointment commission (NJAC) judgment (2015) had 1042 pages;
  • Aadhaar judgment (2018) in Puttaswamy case had 1,448 pages; 
  • The Ayodhya judgment had 1,045 pages.


So in the above three cases we can say that the judiciary is basically running after each other. Hence the Lengthy judgments do not serve any purpose. Rather, they create more inconsistency and bring lots and lots of confusion in case laws. A five-judge bench was created in the Islamic Academy of Education case (2003) to explore the true import of the 11 judge-bench judgment of TMA Pai (2003). But the same was miscarried, and finally a 7 judge-bench in PA Inamdar (2005) resolved the issue.


To curb this situation and chaos there are few solution :


  • The Court also stated that lawyers should also finish their arguments within a short time and should avoid citing unnecessary precedents.


  • The practice of writing lengthy should be changed and judges should contribute meaningful concurring opinions


 It is a matter of fact that in the modern era, no  person has the time and capacity to read overlong documents, books, judgments, etc has significantly reduced. Even lawyers, judges, professors, or even law students, whose work demands serious reading, hardly takes out time in reading books, articles, etc. which provide them knowledge to develop their academic skills. Gone are the days when people used to sit in libraries for hours. In the present times and with the advancement of technology the young as well as the experienced lawyer are the disciples of the internet (google wikipedia and all like quick, short, and easy readings. With this kind of readership, lengthy judgments will go in vain and the half reading of the judgement will result in half-knowledge, which is highly hazardous for the legal for the better understanding of law and making it interesting

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *