Justice Surya Kant underscored that the foremost mission of the judiciary is to deliver justice that ordinary citizens can see, feel and trust, arguing that the true test of the legal system lies in everyday experience rather than in abstract legal doctrine.
Speaking at a public forum on Sunday, the Supreme Court judge said access to timely and meaningful justice for the common person must remain the central benchmark for courts. He stressed that laws and constitutional principles acquire legitimacy only when they translate into fair outcomes on the ground, particularly for those with limited means or social influence.
Courts must be measured by people’s experience, Justice Kant said, adding that a legal system admired for its theory but distrusted in daily life risks losing moral authority. He pointed to delays, procedural complexity and the cost of litigation as challenges that continue to shape how citizens perceive justice delivery.
His remarks come amid sustained debate within the legal community about case backlogs and the strain on courts across the country. Data from the judiciary shows tens of millions of cases pending at various levels, with a large proportion involving civil disputes, land matters and family cases that directly affect livelihoods and social stability. Justice Kant noted that for many litigants, justice delayed is not an academic concept but a lived hardship that can span decades.
He emphasised that judges must remain conscious of the human dimension behind files and citations. Each case, he said, represents individuals and families whose lives are often placed on hold while disputes move through the system. Sensitivity to this reality should inform both judicial reasoning and administrative reform.
Justice Kant also highlighted the importance of simplifying procedures without compromising fairness. He said procedural safeguards exist to protect rights, but excessive formalism can unintentionally exclude those unfamiliar with legal processes. Clearer language in orders, better use of technology, and improved case management were cited as ways to narrow the distance between courts and citizens.
Technology, he observed, has already altered how courts function, from virtual hearings to digital filing systems. While these tools have improved efficiency in many respects, he cautioned that they must be deployed inclusively. Litigants without reliable internet access or digital literacy should not find themselves disadvantaged in a system meant to serve all.
On judicial accountability, Justice Kant said public confidence depends on transparency and consistency. Reasoned judgments, predictable timelines and respectful courtroom conduct contribute to trust as much as landmark rulings do. He added that the judiciary must communicate its role and limitations more clearly, so expectations are grounded in reality rather than frustration.
The judge also spoke about the responsibility of the legal profession in shaping the citizen’s experience of justice. Lawyers, he said, act as the primary interface between courts and litigants, and their conduct can either ease or exacerbate the stress of litigation. Ethical advocacy, clear advice and avoidance of unnecessary adjournments were described as integral to a people-centred justice system.
Justice Kant’s comments align with broader discussions within the judiciary on reform. Initiatives such as time-bound hearings, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms and specialised benches aim to reduce pressure on courts and offer faster relief in suitable cases. Mediation and arbitration, he said, can be effective in resolving disputes where relationships and ongoing cooperation matter more than adversarial outcomes.
He also addressed the role of judges beyond adjudication, noting that administrative leadership within courts can have a tangible impact on efficiency. Allocation of cases, monitoring of progress and coordination with lower courts influence how swiftly justice moves through the system. Leadership that prioritises these aspects can improve outcomes without legislative change.
Singh Deo flags alleged misuse of election watchdog 