Justice on Time

The idea

Picture a shopkeeper in Kanpur whose cheque-bounce case has waited six years. This month a judge opens a draft judgment, every line linked to a page of the record, reads it, makes one change and signs. The shopkeeper has his money back within the season.

Picture a mother in Patna whose daughter was attacked. The trial runs day to day and ends within 60 days of the chargesheet, with forensic reports ready in 30. Justice arrives while it still matters.

Picture a factory in Coimbatore in insolvency, sold as a running business within 180 days, its workers still on the floor under a new owner.

Picture a young man in a district jail, held for a small first offence, released within 30 days because a review committee applied the law that already exists.

Picture a small builder in Pune hit by a false case filed only to stall his project. When the court throws it out, the same judgment orders the other side to pay his legal fees and his losses, and the money reaches his account within 30 days. Next time, nobody files that case.

I believe justice on time is justice. The usual answer to the backlog is more judges, and we will add them. I think we can do far more with what we already have. We have the rules, the digitised records and the virtual courts. Let AI do the reading and sorting, let judges do the judging, and give every case a date it can count on. And when a case is false, let the person who filed it pay for the harm, so the courts are kept for real disputes.

Why now

Here is why I think we can do this now.

The prize is time given back to crores of people. About 5.4 crore cases are pending across our courts, and clearing the simple ones first frees judges for the hard ones.

The groundwork is done. Over 660 crore pages of court records are already scanned under e-Courts, ready to be read.

Faster trials restore freedom. About 74% of prisoners are undertrials awaiting a verdict, and timely trials and reviews can return many to their families.

False cases are cheap to file and costly to fight. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, compensation for a false or vexatious claim is still capped at ₹3,000, a figure the Supreme Court called unrealistic in 2010. A case filed to harass costs the filer almost nothing.

Faster insolvency saves businesses and jobs. Resolution takes about 603 days today, and a 180-day clock keeps firms alive. Court delay is estimated to cost India about $70 billion a year, so even a 10% cut is worth about ₹66,000 crore a year (estimate).

The big moves

Here is the path I see, one step after another.

1. First, let AI read and sort every pending case. The Supreme Court e-Committee runs AI over the digitised records and summarises each case, every point linked to a page of the record. Cases are sorted into three groups: ready to decide, one hearing needed, and full trial needed. The judge in charge can move any case with a one-line reason.

2. Next, clear the simple cases quickly. Petty cases such as traffic challans get an online offer to pay the fixed fine, and anyone who prefers a hearing gets one. For other ready cases, the AI drafts a judgment and the judge adopts it, changes it or sets it aside, and signs. One way is to aim for every ready case decided within 60 days.

3. Then add benches for full trials. For example, about 2,500 additional judges, drawn from retired High Court and district judges, plus evening shifts, hear the cases that need a full trial.

4. Alongside, set clear deadlines in a Fast Justice Act. Serious crime trials run day to day and finish within weeks of the chargesheet, commercial disputes within a few months, and insolvency within 180 days, with a business first offered for sale as a going concern. Adjournments are capped, as the law has long intended.

5. Next, make the loser pay, by default. Every judgment ends with a costs order, with no separate claim needed: the losing side pays the winner's legal fees on a published scale. When a case or a defence is found false, malicious or filed to harass, the loser also pays the winner's proven losses and the court's time, with no cap. A false criminal complaint works the same way: the acquitted person is paid by the complainant, and an officer who knowingly files a false case pays personally. Anyone on free legal aid who loses an honest case is covered by the legal aid fund, so the winner is still paid and no poor family is scared away from court.

6. Finally, keep justice firm, fair and in a judge's hands. Undertrials eligible for release under existing law are reviewed every month. The gravest crimes carry the maximum lawful punishment, with a mitigation report in every case and full appeals. Every judgment is the judge's own, and the gravest cases receive an AI summary only.

Today vs the new way

Here is how I see the new way comparing with today on speed, fairness and cost.

For a small cost, cases move faster, prisons hold fewer people awaiting trial, and every judgment stays in a judge's hands.

Proof it works

India already settles petty cases online. By June 2024, 28 virtual courts in 21 states and union territories had handled about 5.26 crore traffic challan cases and collected ₹579 crore in fines online.

Loser pays works. In England and Wales, costs follow the event: the losing side normally pays the winner's legal costs. Germany sets lawyers' fees on a fixed public scale, and the loser pays them, which keeps costs predictable for both sides. India already wrote this rule for commercial courts in 2015, when the Commercial Courts Act made costs follow the event in business disputes.

America keeps a failing business alive. Under Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code, a business keeps running while it restructures its debts under a court-approved plan, so workers keep their jobs and creditors are paid from a going concern. India's 180-day clock takes America's speed of insolvency resolution as its reference.

Trial deadlines work in law. The US Speedy Trial Act of 1974 requires a federal criminal trial to start within 70 days of indictment.

AI helps judges elsewhere. Brazil's Supreme Federal Court uses the VICTOR system, built with the University of Brasília, to read and classify incoming appeals so judges spend their time on the decision.

Indian courts already set the rules for AI. The Kerala High Court's 2025 AI policy and the Supreme Court's draft AI regulations of 2026 both allow AI as an assistant while the judge keeps full control of the decision.

What success looks like

• In the first 30 days: the Fast Justice Act is passed, AI triage of every pending case is complete, and bucket lists are published for every court.
• In the first 30 days: online fine offers go out for petty cases, and every district completes its first undertrial review.
• Within 1 year: about 2.2 crore ready cases are decided and total pending cases fall below 3.5 crore (estimate).
• Within 1 year: every new serious-crime trial finishes within 60 days, commercial cases within 90 and insolvencies within 180, and undertrials fall below 50% of prisoners.
• Within 1 year: every judgment carries a costs order, and fees and compensation reach the winner within 30 days.
• After year 1: full trials, about 20% of the backlog (estimate), are cleared by the additional benches over the following 2 years.

Guardrail ideas

Ideas to start the conversation, for the builders, experts and the public to shape together.

• Every line traceable. Every line of an AI summary or draft links to a record page or a statute, with any unlinked line removed automatically.
• Quality checked every quarter. The High Court re-reads a random 2% of each judge's AI-assisted judgments, and a judge with more than 2% material errors pauses AI drafts for 3 months and retrains.
• Equal justice for all. AI draft outcomes are compared every quarter by caste, religion, gender and region, with a module paused for any gap above 5 percentage points until it is fixed.
• Loser pays, poor never shut out. The fee scale is public and tied to the value of the claim, so every party knows the risk before filing. Legal aid covers an honest loser on free legal aid, and an unpaid award is recovered from the loser's bank account like any other dues.
• Fair trials on a fast clock. A trial gets one extension of up to 30 days by written order, and bail opens to the accused if it still overruns.

FAQs

Q: Will AI decide cases instead of judges?

A: Judges gain time to decide more cases well. AI drafts only the simple, ready cases, and the judge adopts, changes or sets aside every draft and signs the judgment. Death, life and terror cases receive a summary only.

Q: Can a 60-day trial be fair to the accused?

A: Yes, and speed itself protects the innocent. The clock starts only after the chargesheet, forensic reports arrive in 30 days, free legal aid starts on day 1, one 30-day extension is allowed, and an overrunning trial opens the door to bail.

Q: Won't loser pays scare poor people away from court?

A: It protects them. A poor family with an honest case is covered by legal aid if it loses, and wins its fees back if it wins. The people who should think twice are those who file cases to harass, because they now pay the full cost of the harm.

Q: What if AI invents a citation?

A: Every line is tied to the record. The citation lock removes any unlinked line, 20,000 clerks check each draft, and a quarterly audit pauses drafts for any judge whose error rate tops 2%.

The detailed blueprint for this chapter, a starting draft for the mission heads, industry and the private sector to refine, is in the Implementation Annex.