Author: Vaishnavi Harrish Menon, IInd Year, Bsc. Forensic Science, Criminology and Biochemistry
Kristu Jayanti (Deemed To Be) University, Bengaluru, Karnataka
“Justice does not help those who slumber but helps only those who are vigilant.” – Mahatma Gandhi
1. Introduction
Justice, as defined by the Cambridge Dictionary, is the “fairness in the way people are dealt
with”. The word “justice” comes from the Latin, “justitia”, which means righteousness, equity,
or uprightness.
The Indian Constitution promises social, economic and political justice to every citizen. While
the legal framework promises equality, the everyday reality for many citizens involves
numerous hurdles. For millions of Indians, the courtroom is a distant, expensive and
intimidating institution rather than a venue for redressal.
Despite being the world’s largest democracy, a serious and uncomfortable question is raised:
“Is access to justice in India a guarantee in name only or a reality lived by common citizens?”
2. Constitutional and Legal Promise
India’s legal architecture, on paper, is heavily committed to equal access to justice. Justice is
not a luxury but a fundamental right guaranteed to every citizen under the law. The constitution
of India, envisions an society where justice is accessible to all, regardless of their economic or
social status.
- Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws.
- Article 21 as interpreted by the Supreme Court guarantees not just life and liberty but
also right to speedy and fair trial. - Article 39A added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976, mandates free legal
aid to those who cannot afford it ensuring that the legal system operates and promotes
justice on the basis of equal opportunity.
The legal framework of India, in short, is progressive and robust. However, the ground reality
exposes a deep divide as the problem lies in its implementation. For an ordinary citizen, the
journey to obtain justice if often blocked by economic barriers, judicial delays, institutional
deficits and systemic bias.
3. The Gap Between Promise and Reality
3.1. The Expense of Litigation : The Cost of Being Heard
While Article 39A led to the creation of National Legal Services Authority(NALSA), legal aid
in India remains underfunded and underutilized. Economic inequality favours wealthy litigants
with better legal representation, while marginalised individuals struggles to access justice.
Court, legal fees, travel, documentation, and lost daily wages costs make justice unaffordable
for many Indians. Over 75% of the India’s prison population comprises of undertrials, who
remain confined simply because they cannot afford bail or basic legal counsel.
3.2. Judicial Pendency : “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied”
India’s judiciary faces an unprecedented backlog making the system severely stretched. More
than 5.19 crore cases are pending across Supreme Court, High Courts and Subordinate
Judiciary. The delay is compounded by an acute shortage of judges. India’s sanctioned judicial
strength is around 25,000 judges, while a Supreme Court – commissioned report estimated that
nearly 70,000 judges are needed for achieving the Law Commission’s recommended standard
of 50 judges per million people. A lawsuit in India can take decades to resolve, meaning that
for many, justice arrives too late to offer a relief. A striking real world example is the 1987
Hashimpura massacre case, where victims waited 31 years for the Delhi High Court to finally
convict 16 former provincial armed constabulary personnel in 2018. Similarly in State of UP
v. Surajpal, the Supreme Court in 2023 acquitted an 85-year-old man in a land dispute case
after 42 years of litigation, highlighting how justice often arrives well past a lifetime.
3.3. Infrastructure Crisis : Geographic Barriers
Access to courts is heavily skewed toward urban centres. Rural and tribal populations have to
travel long distances to reach the nearest court. This mirrors imbalance in the access to justice
where meaningful outreach simply does not exist for large swathes of rural India.
3.4. Social Barriers : Undertrial Crisis, Language, Legal Literacy and Awareness
Data from recent prison statistics show that roughly two in three undertrial prisoners belong to
Scheduled Castes, Schedules Tribes or Other Backward Class Communities. This indicates that
to a greater extent, the criminal justice system entangles the country’s marginalised groups.
Court proceedings, especially in higher courts are conducted in English and use dense legal
terms. This alienates litigants who do not understand the process determining their fate and
justice. Many citizens lack the awareness of their rights and remedies available to them,
including the right to legal aid.
4. Institutional Response and Reforms
Despite these gaps, India’s judicial system has worked genuinely to broaden the access to
justice and reduce the burden on courts. NALSA and Lok Adalats provide affordable and
informal dispute resolution, particularly for cases that are settlement based. Under Trial Review
Committess (UTRCs) review cases of undertrials to identify those that are eligible for release
helping to reduce unnecessary detention. E-courts have expanded digital filing, virtual hearings
and National Judicial Date Grid (NJDG), improving transparency on case status. Public Interest
Litigation (PIL) enables courts to address issues revolving around marginalised communities.
Tele-Law services that are backed by Government, helps rural citizens to connect with lawyers
remotely.
5. The Way Forward by Bridging the Gaps
India can improve access to justice by filling judicial vacancies, increasing judicial capacity,
funding legal aid, and strengthening the Legal Aid Defense Counsel System. Exposure to legal
literacy and awareness can help marginalised communities to understand their rights.
Strengthening ADR mechanisms and bail reforms, and expanding digitisation process can
reduce backlogs and court burden. Promoting regional languages, at least by appointing
translators in courts can ensure that justice is inclusive to rural communities. The Indian justice
system should be broad, affordable and accessible to all citizens of the country.
6. Conclusion
Justice in India is not out of reach, but it remains easier for the privileged to access than the
marginalized. While the constitutional vision of justice is expansive and admirable, the distance
between this vision and reality remains vast. True access requires systemic reform, new
schemes, sustained political will, adequate funding and a justice system where laws are built
around the citizen it is meant to serve.
7. Reference
1. Guruswamy, M., & Singh, A. (2010). Accessing injustice: The Gram Nyayalaya Act,https://www.epw.in/journal/2010/43
2. Thilagaraj, R. (2022). Access to justice in India: Managing multiple mechanisms in a
restrictive practice environment. In H. M. Kritzer & H. Whalen-Bridge (Eds.), The
Role of Lawyers in Access to Justice (pp. 65–88). Cambridge University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009184281
3. Law Commission of India. (1986). Gram Nyayalaya (Report No. 114). Ministry of
Law and Justice, Government of India. https://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/cat-1980
1989/
4. Anita Kushwaha v. Pushap Sudan, (2016) 8 SCC 509 (India). (Note: Recognized
“Access to Justice” as a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 14 and Article 21
of the Constitution of India). Economic and Political Weekly, 45(43), 16
Disclaimer: This article is published for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, legal opinion, or professional counsel. It does not create a lawyer–client relationship. All views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author and represent their independent analysis. Times Law does not endorse, verify, or assume responsibility for the author’s views or conclusions. While editorial standards are maintained, Times Law, the author, and the publisher disclaim all liability for any errors, omissions, or consequences arising from reliance on this content. Readers are advised to consult a qualified legal professional before acting on any information herein. Use of this article is at the reader’s own risk.
