The iconic Bollywood dialogue "taarikh pe taarikh" (date after date) remains a painfully accurate depiction of India's justice delivery system, as courts in the national capital grapple with a staggering backlog of cases. At the start of 2026, the pendency in Delhi's lower courts has reached a monumental 15.85 lakh cases, a number that is projected to climb further.
The Mounting Crisis of Pendency
Despite an army of over 700 judges hearing approximately 28,000 cases daily, the system is overwhelmed. Data reveals that while around 60% of cases are disposed of within a year, the gap between new cases filed and those resolved remains wide. From 2018 to 2025, this difference averaged 1.3 lakh cases annually, ensuring the pile keeps growing.
A significant portion of this backlog consists of cheque bounce cases, which legally must be settled within six months. Ironically, these cases have surged by over a lakh in the past year alone and now constitute four out of every ten cases pending in Delhi's courts.
Adjournments: The Primary Culprit
According to Senior Advocate and Central Bureau of Investigation Special Public Prosecutor DP Singh, the relentless granting of adjournments is the core reason for this crisis. Drawing from his 35 years of legal experience, Singh stated, "Based on my 35 years of legal experience, I can say that adjournments is the biggest reason for pendency."
He explained the domino effect: "Adjournments beget adjournments. When an adjournment is granted during arguments with weeks or months between hearings, the hearing practically starts afresh. The judge has to be reoriented, and an argument that could have taken 2-3 hours ends up taking 15-20 hours."
New Laws and the Path to Reform
The three new criminal laws introduced by the government aim to address this delay by laying down specific timelines for conducting trials and delivering verdicts. The laws also include provisions for summary trials and trial and conviction in absentia.
However, experts like Singh emphasize that legislative change alone is insufficient without deep institutional reform. He proposes concrete measures to curb adjournments:
- Advance Preparation: In bail hearings, both sides should come with status reports or replies after advance notice, allowing matters to be decided the same day.
- Time-bound Arguments: Courts should set strict time limits for arguments.
- Pre-hearing Exchanges: Lawyers should exchange notes of arguments and relevant judgments beforehand. Judges must stop counsel from repeating irrelevant points.
- Bunching of Cases: The High Court and Supreme Court can club similar legal issues together for combined hearings.
Singh concludes, "When arguments are short and focused, adjournments would cease to exist." The challenge for India's judiciary is to transform these procedural suggestions into everyday practice to finally move beyond the cycle of "taarikh pe taarikh" and deliver timely justice.
