427 new posts, day-to-day hearings: Delhi’s push to clear backlog in trial courts

There are just over 740 judges in Delhi’s trial courts, a number that has remained stagnant since 2015. Each judge handles an average of more than 2,100 cases. Court staff, meanwhile, are operating at around 80% of sanctioned strength, which hasn’t been revised in close to two decades. More than 1,700 posts of court staff are lying vacant against a sanctioned strength of 8,575.

Bail hearings

While the Delhi government is building new courts and creating additional posts, there is some internal change underway as well.

Trial courts are now directing accused persons seeking bail to file affidavits containing relevant details before arguments are heard to expedite proceedings and to maintain “transparency”. The affidavit will include case details, status of the trial and criminal antecedents, among others.

A Delhi High Court circular dated March 19, displayed outside multiple trial courtrooms, states: “Every petitioner or applicant seeking bail, at any stage of proceedings, shall disclose all material particulars, including criminal antecedents and the existence of any coercive processes such as issuance of non-bailable warrants, declared as a proclaimed offender, or similar proceedings, duly supported by an affidavit.”

The circular has been issued in the backdrop of a February 11 HC order that framed directions for filing the affidavits.

The affidavit is required to include the FIR number and date, police station, sections invoked, maximum punishment prescribed, date of arrest, period of custody undergone, stage of proceedings, number of witnesses cited in the chargesheet and examined, and details of other FIRs, including whether they are pending, ended in acquittal or resulted in conviction.

Judges have increasingly begun directing accused persons to file these affidavits before hearing bail arguments.

Day-to-day trials

Another change has been the focus on ensuring day-to-day trials.

A circular issued last year has directed judicial officers to ensure proceedings are held expeditiously. “…When the stage of examination of witnesses starts, such examination shall be continued from day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, except for special reasons to be recorded in writing,” it said.

The circular had stated that when witnesses are in attendance, “no adjournment or postponement shall be granted without examining them”, except for special reasons recorded in writing. Also, courts should not grant adjournments to suit an advocate’s convenience, except on very exceptional grounds such as bereavement in the family, it added.

The circular, stuck outside multiple courtrooms in Delhi’s trial courts, added that in case of non-cooperation by counsel, the court shall “satisfy itself whether the non-cooperation is in active collusion with the accused to delay the trial”. If a court finds that this is in active collusion with an accused, it may, after recording reasons in writing, issue notice to the accused out on bail, asking why the bail should not be cancelled.

Courts may also impose costs “commensurate with the loss suffered by witnesses”, including expenses incurred in attending court.