Content

1. Calling out the criticism of the Indian judiciary
2. Ensure compliance

Calling out the criticism of the Indian judiciary

Why in News

• Sanjeev Sanyal, member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, recently claimed that India’s judicial system is the single biggest hurdle to achieving Viksit Bharat within 25 years.
• This sparked debate on whether judicial inefficiency or governmental failures actually impede India’s development.

Relevance:

• GS 2: Polity & GovernanceStructure, Organization, and Functioning of the JudiciarySeparation of Powers between various organs

Practice Question :

• Judicial delay is often a symptom of deeper governance and legislative inefficiencies rather than a cause. Critically examine this statement in light of recent debates over the judiciary’s role in India’s development. (250 words)

Core Issue

• A growing narrative is blaming courts for slowing economic progress.
• Such oversimplified criticism ignores deeper governance and legislative failures.

Problems with the Claim

• Misinformed criticism: Courts are portrayed as lazy and over-vacationed — misleading and factually incorrect.
• False attribution: Delays stem from systemic weaknesses, not solely judicial inefficiency.
• Judiciary mirrors governance failure: Courts reflect the broader administrative and legislative shortcomings of the State.

Structural Realities of the Judiciary

• Workload: Judges handle 50–100 cases daily; preparation, drafting, and research continue beyond court hours.
• Vacations: Used to write reserved judgments; vacation benches function throughout.
• Vacancies: Severe shortage of judges compounds case pendency — among the highest in the world.

Legislative and Executive Failures Feeding Delays

• Poorly drafted laws:Vague, inconsistent, and optics-driven legislation creates confusion and litigation.
  • Example: Section 12A, Commercial Courts Act (2015) — mandatory pre-suit mediation, a parliamentary, not judicial creation.
• Excessive government litigation:
  • Government = India’s largest litigant.
  • Ministries and tax authorities appeal routine orders up to the Supreme Court.
  • Public servants and pensioners forced to litigate for basic entitlements.
• The “99-to-1 Problem”: Laws overdesigned to prevent misuse by a few — a legislative flaw, not a judicial one.

Illustrations of Flawed Lawmaking

• Criminal Law Reforms 2023: Cosmetic renaming of IPC/CrPC/Evidence Act to Sanhitas without true structural reform.
• New Income-Tax Act (2025): Claimed “simplification” adds greater complexity; replacing ‘notwithstanding’ with ‘irrespective’ increases ambiguity — old problems in new form.

The Lower Judiciary Crisis

• Real delays and inefficiencies occur in district and subordinate courts, where most citizens interact with justice.
• Infrastructure outdated, vacancies high, digital systems uneven — chronic bottlenecks persist.

Broader Constitutional Context

• Courts’ role: Serve as checks on executive and legislative excess, not mere instruments of “speedy governance.”
• Democracy vs. Development: Judicial independence and due process are essential pillars of real development.

Way Forward

• Judicial reform must focus on:
  • Filling vacancies swiftly.
  • Modernising court infrastructure and digital systems.
  • Curbing government litigation through pre-screening and accountability.
  • Improving legislative drafting for clarity and precision.
• Shift from blame narrative to systemic accountability and institutional reform.

Takeaway

• India’s judiciary is imperfect but indispensable.
• The true hurdles to Viksit Bharat lie in bad lawmaking, bureaucratic inertia, and unrestrained government litigation, not the courts.
• Real reform begins with governance, not judicial scapegoating.

Data and Facts

Case Pendency and Workload

• Supreme Court: 80,963 cases pending as of March 2025; reached 88,047 in August 2025, showing a net increase.
• High Courts: 62,46,095 cases pending.
• District & Subordinate Courts: 4,67,69,935 cases pending.
• District/Subordinate Courts Output: Over 32 crore orders/judgments issued; 4.6 crore cases still pending nationwide (mid-2025).

Judges and Vacancies

• Total Judges: About 21,000 (≈15 judges per million population).
• Law Commission Recommendation: 50 judges per million.
• Vacancies:
  • High Courts: 33%
  • District Courts: 21%

Workload and Diversity

• High Caseload per Judge: Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, and Kerala district courts report 4,000+ cases per judge.
• Women in Judiciary:
  • District Courts: 38% judges are women.
  • Police Force: 8% of officers are women, but 78% of police stations have Women Help Desks.

Judicial Infrastructure

• Court Halls: Increased to 22,062 (2025) from 15,818 (2014).
• Residential Units: Expanded substantially for judicial officers.
• Indicates significant investment in infrastructure under e-Courts and modernization initiatives.

Speed and Efficiency

• Supreme Court: Disposal rate fluctuates with working days and case priorities.
• Fast Track Courts:
  • 725 operational, including 392 exclusive POCSO courts.
  • 3.34 lakh+ cases disposed of (2025).
  • Focus on vulnerable groups and gender-based crimes.

Ensure compliance

Context and Background

• Aatmanirbhar Bharat aims to make India self-reliant across key sectors, including pharmaceutical manufacturing, a global strength for India.
• However, recurring incidents of substandard drug quality, especially cough syrups, threaten India’s credibility as the “pharmacy of the world.”

Relevance:

• GS 2: Governance, Health, and Policy Implementation
• GS 3: Science & Technology, Economy, and Public HealthHealth Sector ReformsRegulatory Mechanisms in Pharmaceutical Sector

Practice Question :

• “Aatmanirbhar Bharat cannot be achieved by manufacturing alone; it demands uncompromising quality assurance.” Discuss with reference to India’s pharmaceutical sector. (250 words)

Recent Trigger

• Union Health Ministry has sought strict compliance with revised Schedule M norms under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules.
• This came after the Tamil Nadu Drugs Control Department found Diethylene Glycol (DEG) above permissible limits in Coldrif cough syrup.
• The syrup was linked to the deaths of at least 14 children in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

Investigation Findings

• DEG detected in one batch by Tamil Nadu authorities despite the Health Ministry initially ruling it out in other samples.
• The manufacturing facility violated several Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and Good Laboratory Practices (GLP).
• The contamination occurred due to use of non-pharmacopoeial grade propylene glycol, leading to DEG and ethylene glycol contamination — both nephrotoxic (kidney-damaging) substances.
• CDSCO recommended cancellation of the company’s manufacturing licence.
• A doctor who prescribed the syrup to many deceased children was arrested.

Larger Structural Concerns

• India’s drug regulation and quality control systems remain reactive, not preventive.
• Lax enforcement, weak inter-State coordination, and infrequent inspections enable recurring quality lapses.
• Regulatory authorities often act only after fatalities occur, not when early warning signs emerge.

Existing Frameworks

• India already has a Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) and Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) framework.
• Schedule M (revised) sets stringent production, hygiene, and record-keeping norms for all pharmaceutical manufacturers.
• However, implementation and enforcement remain inconsistent across States.

Editorial’s Core Argument

• India must adopt a zero-tolerance policy for substandard drugs.
• “Hawk-like monitoring” and regular surprise inspections of manufacturing facilities are essential.
• Enforcement should be strict and continuous, not incident-driven.
• Every violation, irrespective of scale, must attract swift punitive action to create deterrence.

Broader Implications

• Incidents of poor-quality drugs tarnish India’s global image as a trusted pharma exporter.
• Such lapses threaten public health, international trade credibility, and domestic confidence in healthcare systems.
• A robust quality control and regulatory mechanism is integral to achieving Aatmanirbhar Bharat and export competitiveness.

Way Forward

• Institutional reforms: Strengthen the CDSCO and State-level drug regulators through manpower, training, and funding.
• Transparent inspections: Mandate real-time publication of inspection and test results.
• Strict penal action: Revoke licences, prosecute offenders, and ensure criminal liability for negligent manufacturers.
• Technology-enabled monitoring: Implement digital traceability systems for raw materials and drug batches.
• Public accountability: Ensure citizen reporting mechanisms for adverse drug reactions or suspected poor-quality drugs.

Key Takeaway

• Self-reliance without safety undermines credibility.
• To truly achieve Aatmanirbhar Bharat, India must match manufacturing capacity with uncompromising quality control.
• Preventive vigilance, not post-crisis action, must define India’s pharmaceutical regulatory ethos.