National Judicial Data Grid

What is NJDG?

The National Judicial Data Grid is an initiative launched under the e-Courts Project under the Ministry of Law and Justice. This database is a collection of judgements, orders and cases, both civil and criminal under the court system of India. It has separate databases for Supreme Court, High Court as well as District Courts. It lists out the total number of cases under that Court, the number of pending cases and classifies them under their civil and criminal nature.

It is launched as a project under the “National Policy and Action Plan for Implementation of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) In the Indian Judiciary”. It is put forward by the Supreme Court of India’s e-Committee. This project is managed under the Government of India, Department of Justice and the Ministry of Law and Justice.

The NJDG-SCI portal can be accessed through the website of the Supreme Court of India by clicking on the tab button – ‘NJDG’. The websites for the High Court and the District Courts can be accessed in the page of the Department of Justice.

There are three main webpages of the NJDG-SCI portal:

At a glance

Pending dashboard

Disposed dashboard

---

Official definition of NJDG

This section describes the “National Judicial Data Grid” as defined in various legislations, documents and official government reports.

The National Judicial Data Grid (hereinafter referred to as NJDG), has not been defined under any legislation as of today. However, It has been in various sources as listed below:

1. Department of Justice website:

National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) is a database of orders, judgments and case details of 18,735 District & Subordinate Courts and High Courts created as an online platform under the eCourts Project. Data is updated on a near real-time basis by the connected District and Taluka courts. It provides data relating to judicial proceedings/decisions of all computerized district and subordinate courts of the country. All High Courts have also joined the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) through web services, providing easy access facility to the litigant public. Case data is available on NJDG for both civil and criminal cases with the ability to perform drill-down analysis based on the age of the case as well as the State and District.

1. e-Committee of the Supreme Court:

National Judicial data grid (NJDJ) is the database where our entire judicial case data, including orders and judgements, are stored under the two heads:

(i) District and Taluk Court NJDG; and

(ii) High Court NJDG

NJDG data is available on a real-time basis. These statistics are updated every day by the respective Courts across the country through the Case Information System (CIS). NJDG got the stamp of the world bank and moved India 20 ranks forward in the ranking of countries under ease of doing business. Administrative login to NJDG will give greater details ,inputs and reports. The real-time statistics of NJDG can be used in multifarious ways by the administrative judges: (i) Court Management Tool; (ii) Case Management Tool; (iii) Policy Planning; (iv) Policy decision making; and (v) Digital inspection, etc.

2. National Informatics Centre (NIC)

National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), a flagship project implemented under the aegis of the e-Committee Supreme Court of India, is a system for monitoring pendency and disposal of the cases in High Courts and Subordinate Courts. NJDG provides a comprehensive database of orders, judgements, and case details of District and Subordinate Courts and High Courts. The statistics of pendency at National, State, District and at Individual Court level is available to anyone visiting the National Judicial Data Grid portal.

It also serves as a decision support system to the management authorities like Supreme Courts and respective High Courts, to monitor pendency on varied attributes for effective decision-making.

3. E-courts.gov.in

The NJDG allows the status of every case in the country to be tracked through its system and database, including various attributes. It includes total cases, civil and criminal cases as well as those over a year old. It is a managerial tool for the functioning of the judiciary, providing data on the pendency being available to common people, lawyers, litigants etc.

4. Press Information Bureau Report (PIB)

There have been multiple PIB releases regarding the National Judicial Data Grid project. They have been summarized as under:

National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) is a database of orders, judgments and case details of 18,735 District & Subordinate Courts and High Courts created as an online platform under the eCourts Project. NJDG works as a monitoring tool to identify, manage and  reduce pendency of cases. It helps to provide timely inputs for making policy decisions to reduce delays in disposing of cases and helps in reducing case pendency. It provides data relating to judicial proceedings/decisions of all computerized district and subordinate courts of the country.

---

OBJECTIVES, USES, BENEFITS

The initiative is set up under the E-Courts Project of the Department of Justice. the main objectives of the e-Courts project is to bring more transparency in judicial matters and to bring the judiciary closer to the common litigant of India. The common litigant of India should be able to access the judicial services without incurring the huge cost that they have to bear today, despite being poor. Such a system aims to provide a comprehensive look into the caseload of the judiciary and to receive it in an organised fashion at every level of the judiciary.

USES

As discussed before, National Judicial Data Grid keeps a record of the status of the pending cases. It is envisaged and has been developed as a tool to help reducing the number of pending cases in the courts. It provides very useful information at the case level. For example, the age of a case the information about the court in which the case is pending judge name, etc.

BENEFITS

• increased transparency
• accountability and responsibility
• improved efficiency
• increased coordination
• informed decision making
• optimum deployment of resources and manpower
• single source of data
• huge potential for high-quality research work
• Works as a monitoring tool to identify, manage & reduce pendency of cases
• Helps to provide timely inputs for making policy decisions to reduce delays in disposal of cases
• Facilitates better monitoring of court performance and thus, serves as an efficient resource management tool

Features:

NJDG provides the consolidated figures of pendency of cases in Judiciary

Statistical data is automatically updated daily Pending Civil and Criminal Cases segregated into varied categories Information pertaining to Institution and Disposal of cases is shown Statistical figures are provided in drill-down manner Serves as National Judicial Data Warehouse Developed using elastic search technology.

Functioning and Types

Setup

One can generate different types of reports agewise, stagewise, case type-wise list, orders not uploaded list, undated cases list of every District, Taluk, High Court wise, Judgewise etc. Example: List of particular case type which are 20/30/40 years old from all District Courts; List of cases pending in District Courts which are stayed by High Court, Supreme Court; List of appeals pending with percentage of more than 5-year-old appeals; which court has the most number of appeals; List of the officers who have disposed of the Highest cases/Lowest cases; total number of Writ Petitions, First Appeals, Revisions, etc, can be easily known through the dashboard.

On the main dashboard of the National Judicial Data Grid, there are provisions/buttons for viewing SC, HC and DC data separately.

The various cases are classified under pending and disposed off which can be found by just one click.

This is the first view one receives when they arrive at the NJDG. The top left hand side, next to the search bar is where one can find the buttons for pending cases, under the heading of “Pending Dashboard” and disposed cases under “Disposed Dashboard”. Next to that are clicks to avail information regarding reasons for delay, under “Delay Reason” and “Information Management”.

Additionally, the functional and regional variations are also highlighted at the top right corner of the database. There is a different grid available for High court and Supreme Court cases.

The High Court data grid gives the information regarding all HC cases, pending or disposed, classified into different criteria on this page.

The Supreme Court data grid gives the information regarding all SC cases, pending or disposed, classified into different criteria on this page.

Within the grid for HC cases, the top right corner of the grid provides for availing information regarding District Court cases as well.

The District Court data grid gives the information regarding all DC cases, pending or disposed, classified into different criteria on this page.

---

International experience

US

The US has The Court Statistics Project which is a comparable U.S. state court caseload database sourced directly from state courts using national standards and guidelines. Unlike India, it broadly classifies cases into 5 categories, civil, criminal, domestic relations, juvenile, and traffic. This classification into 5 categories, provides for a more thorough and well-classified organisation for the cases. It draws from more than 50 years of professional court administration experience to provide a comprehensive overview of state court caseload data.

The United States also has several reports as opposed to one consolidated report that provides insights regarding the caseloads for the federal court. The United States Courts website provides a multitude of reports with statistical tables, charts, and analyses related to the world of U.S. Courts. The two reports that are identical to the national judicial Data grid are the Federal Judicial caseload statistics report and the Judicial Facts and Figures Report. These however are reports that provide the data for the caseloads historically. The judicial facts and figures report provides comprehensive data on the U.S. courts of appeals, the U.S. district courts, and the U.S. bankruptcy courts. The Federal Judicial Caseload Statistics provides a report of statistical information on the caseload of the federal courts for the 12 months ending March 31. Both of these sites can be found on the website itself and can be found under the reports section. Further, on opening each tab, it provides reports for each year.

Additionally, certain states in the US have sites that provide all judiciary-related data. For example, the Arizona state court website, in the “cases before the court” section under the AZ Supreme Court, gives even case summaries for the cases that have come to them.

UK:

The Courts and Tribunals judiciary website is an all-encompassing website, that provides details about the UK justice system and the judgments and sentencing remarks section provides a case finder which is a repository for the cases, making for easy access. These cases are updated frequently.

Additionally, The UK government website leads us to the criminal courts statistics website, all of which will be cited down below as well. The aforementioned site has several reports for each year, that provide data, with each type of court organized separately, like the county courts, magistrate courts, etc. It provides a comprehensive report each year. The website provides details as to when it will be updated next. The data is split across three stages of the justice system: crime recorded to police decision, police referral to prosecution by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), and charge to case completion in court.

Comparison to the National Judicial Data Grid

The US and UK versions of judicial data collection for providing access share the common intention of providing data that is easy to access to promote transparency, accountability, and value creation. The Indian version is consolidated in a manner that ensures that all information can be accessed in one place, and it is live which ensures that it constantly updates and people get access to the accurate information.

International experience:

1. https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics/federal-judicial-caseload-statistics-2024
2. https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/reports/statistical-reports/judicial-facts-and-figures/judicial-facts-and-figures-2023
3. https://criminal-justice-delivery-data-dashboards.justice.gov.uk/about
4. https://www.azcourts.gov/statistics/Interactive-Data-Dashboards

1. https://www.courtstatistics.org/court-statistics/interactive-caseload-data-displays/csp-stat
2. https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/high-court/

RESEARCH THAT ENGAGES WITH NJDG

The e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary - A paper was written by K Verma on the efforts made by the Supreme Court through the e-Courts Project to use information and communication technology to make easier the life of litigants as well as the judiciary with respect to cases, their pendency as well as organisation of the various cases within the Indian Judiciary. The NJDG is an outcome of this e-Courts project .It provides an online, real-time information on around 25 million pending cases in all the levels of the Indian courts. This article is the main research work on the National Judicial Data Grid.

1. World Bank Report: According to the Report on Ease of Doing Business, 2016 by the World Bank that specifically measures judicial performance for investors to look into amongst other parameters, ranked India at 178. It was praised as it led to generation of case management reports, contributing to the digital setup of the caseloads within the judiciary.
2. An analysis of the digitisation of judiciary - in a paper by Deb jyoti das, the article looks at the usage of IT within the judiciary and sections cover the backlog of cases within the judiciary, and the incorporation of ICT in the functioning of the judiciary. They highlight that the NJDG will function as a ‘monitoring tool’ that aims to provide data on case pendency. The main objective of the same is to reduce the caseload and backlog of cases within the various courts of the country. They have proposed that the NJDG must also cover a wider ranger of cases and provide for more classification including the field of juvenile justice.

The National Judicial Data Grid has been used in and encouraged by many Indian cases in the past few years.

Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v State of Maharashtra and Ors. (2021)

One of such prominent cases is Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v State of Maharashtra and Ors. (2021) regarding the importance of choosing bail over giving a long term jail sentence as a basic rule of our criminal justice system. This case underscores the importance of the NJDG as a valuable instrument in promoting access to justice, especially for cases regarding liberty. Referring to external articles and judgements, this case laid down how this database can be utilized in order to effectively address cases regarding bail applications. Inferring from the extensive data available on the NJDG, the court emphasised on the importance of using such tools within all levels of the judicial hierarchy in order to approach cases efficiently and remedy the institutional problem of bail applications.

The courts in this case, referred to the NJDG to find bail application cases that are pending, depending extensively on NJDG for collecting data and coming to a conclusion for the case.

Lok Prahari v. Union of India (2023)

This case also extensively referred to NJDG in order to collect data and decide the case. The counsels in this case compiled a table of pending cases before the High Courts and also classified it into criminal and civil cases.

Gati Kausar India Ltd. v. B.K. Structural Contracts Private Ltd. (2023)

Although not utilising the NJDG as such, this particular case gives insight into a possible development that can be done towards developing a better database regarding all cases. A major chunk of cases, especially commercial cases, are being referred to arbitration. The Gati Kausar case highlights the importance of including the data regarding arbitral awards and pending cases as well. This will help courts to obtain information regarding the challenges that are made to existing arbitral awards and any other information.

Challenges

Data from the National Judicial Data Grid shows that, in 2020, the country’s high courts—the apex courts in each Indian state and union territory—disposed of fewer than half as many cases as they did in 2019. However, since the number of cases instituted fell only by one-third, the total number of pending cases increased. This problem has major consequences for India’s judiciary and its wider political system.

At present, the high courts list 5.8 million pending cases, even though their average rate of disposal between 2015 and 2019 was about 1.8 million cases per year. In most years, the number of cases disposed of is lower than the number of cases instituted, so the problem keeps getting worse.

In practice, this backlog means that many important questions of law do not receive timely answers. Important constitutional law cases—many of them relating to citizens’ fundamental rights—have been pending for years or even decades. In criminal cases, delays create great hardships, as the accused—many of them housed in jail—often must wait years for a verdict. Pendency also makes economic activity difficult, as contract enforcement becomes inordinately expensive. According to the 2020 edition of the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business rankings, India ranked 163 (out of 190 countries) on contract enforcement.

There are many structural challenges that need to be addressed for the adoption of the National Judicial Data Grid to work well:

1. Digital literacy:

A huge structural challenge that exists is the lack of  widespread digital literacy. In India, digital literacy often varies across age, ethnicity and geography. For instance, out of the 743.19 million internet subscribers in India, the internet rural penetration rate is only 32.24% (with 285.97 million subscribers) which is less than one third of the urban penetration rate of 99.12% (with 457.23 million subscribers).268 Further, it is estimated that out of total 5,97,618 inhabited villages, including Gram Panchayats in the country (as per the Census 2011), only about 5,69,897 are covered by mobile services, leaving around 27,721 villages that are not covered by mobile services. For the NJDG to penetrate households across India, the digital infrastructure has to be improved vastly. While initiatives like the Digital India mission have given some benefits, large scale work has to be done in this area.

1. Gender divide in access to technology

Among the people who lack access to technology, women suffer the most among them. As per Internet India Report 2019, women constitute only 1/3rd of internet users in India. The situation is even worse in rural India where women constitute only 28 per cent of the internet users. Due to the uneven distribution of access to technology, only 27 percent of the rural population has access to the internet whereas in urban India, internet has percolated to 51 percent of the population. This shows that there exists a stark rural and gender divide, and if immediate measures to bridge this gap aren’t taken, it can further exacerbate the digital divide in our demography.

1. Lack of trust

This mistrust primarily stems from  scepticism regarding technology. If the NJDG needs to be mainstreamed, then this issue of trust should be addressed at every level. Like every emerging technology, the NJDG is bound to be received with skepticism, especially regarding its effectiveness given the lack of in-person interactions, as well as regarding data security and confidentiality.

What we can learn from other countries?

The CSP STAT’s, categorization of the cases into 5 types is admirable and simplifies searching. The Indian model can be said to have a focus on just civil or criminal, this can be found to be lacking as there can be cases that can’t strictly be placed into two categories, for example, that of traffic, for which the US model has an entirely different category. This quality, if added to the NJDG would make it significantly better in terms of ease of searching and organization.

Overall, this gris is still in its nascent stages and shows promise. The hope is that the criticisms and challenges pointed out are addressed. It holds immense potential to revolutionize the Indian justice system and is an opportunity to ensure that all citizens have access to such valuable information. It is important that there should be awareness that such a tool exists, otherwise, it would not be able to make the impact that it has the potential to make. This could be a tool to bridge the gap between the ordinary citizen and the courts of law if utilized properly.

Moreover, Gati Kausar India Ltd. v. B.K. Structural Contracts Private Ltd, (2023) suggests including arbitral awards, challenges and other information regarding arbitration cases in India. This will help improve the overall working and efficiency of the institution of arbitration in India, not only for the judicial offices but also for the citizens.