Judicial infrastructure panel submits interim report to CJI

Polity & Governance · 1 September 2026 · Based on The Hindu (original report)

2-minute summary

The Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee, constituted by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant in May 2026, has submitted its interim report. Chaired by Supreme Court Judge Justice Aravind Kumar, the committee was tasked with assessing the infrastructural requirements of Indian courts and identifying necessary financial allocations. The committee's blueprint focuses on modernizing court complexes, improving working conditions for judicial officers, and recommending facilities for litigants, lawyers, and visitors. It also emphasizes accelerating the e-Courts initiative to bridge the digital divide and offer citizen-centric services. This development comes at a critical juncture when the judiciary faces high case pendency, courtroom shortages, and a reduced budgetary allocation for the Ministry of Law and Justice in the 2026-27 Union Budget (reduced to ₹4,509.06 crore from ₹4,998.24 crore in the previous fiscal).

Why it's in the news

The Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee, led by Supreme Court Justice Aravind Kumar, submitted its interim report on court modernization and financial requirements to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on August 31, 2026.

Background and context

The Indian judiciary has long grappled with severe infrastructural deficits, which directly contribute to the pendency of over 5 crore cases across various courts. Historically, court infrastructure development has been sluggish due to a lack of dedicated financial planning and coordination between state governments and High Courts. Under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary, funds are allocated to states, but utilization remains low due to delays in land acquisition and matching state-share releases. In 2021, the Supreme Court proposed a National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India (NJIAI) to act as a centralized body for managing funds, though it faced resistance from several state governments. The newly constituted Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee (2026) aims to address these persistent bottlenecks by creating a modern, tech-driven, and inclusive blueprint for court complexes.

Constitutional provisions

• Article 21 — The right to a speedy trial and access to justice is recognized as an integral part of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty.
• Article 39A — Directs the State to secure equal justice and free legal aid, which requires adequate physical and digital judicial infrastructure.
• Article 227 — Power of superintendence of High Courts over all subordinate courts, including their administrative and infrastructural oversight.

Committees and reports

• Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee — Chaired by Justice Aravind Kumar; formulated a blueprint for modernizing court complexes, bridging the digital divide, and assessing financial requirements.

Government schemes

• e-Courts Mission Mode Project — A national policy and action plan for implementation of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the Indian Judiciary.
• Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary — Aims to assist state governments in constructing court buildings and residential accommodation for judicial officers.

Mains practice: Inadequate judicial infrastructure is a major bottleneck in achieving the constitutional goal of timely justice. Analyze the challenges and suggest reforms in light of the recent recommendations of the Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee.

The Indian judiciary is burdened with over 5 crore pending cases, a crisis compounded by severe infrastructural deficits. Access to justice, guaranteed under Article 21 and Article 39A of the Constitution, remains compromised due to inadequate courtrooms, lack of basic amenities, and a persistent digital divide. The recently constituted Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee (2026), chaired by Justice Aravind Kumar, has submitted an interim report addressing these critical gaps.

**Key Challenges in Judicial Infrastructure:**

• **Physical Deficiencies:** Many lower courts operate from rented premises without basic amenities like clean drinking water, separate toilets for women, or waiting rooms for litigants.

• **The Digital Divide:** While the e-Courts project has made strides, taluka and district courts in remote areas lack stable internet connectivity and modern hardware, hindering virtual hearings.

• **Financial Constraints and Underutilization:** The Union Budget 2026-27 reduced the allocation for the Ministry of Law and Justice to ₹4,509.06 crore. Furthermore, funds under Centrally Sponsored Schemes often lapse due to delays in land acquisition and state-matching contributions.

• **Lack of Standardized Planning:** Court designs rarely account for the needs of differently-abled individuals, senior citizens, or the rising volume of digital litigation.

**Reforms and Way Forward:**

• **Standardized Modernization Blueprint:** Implement the committee's recommendations to build modern, climate-resilient, and inclusive court complexes with dedicated spaces for litigants and lawyers.

• **Strengthening e-Courts:** Prioritize the integration of digital tools, ensuring high-speed internet connectivity down to the taluka level to bridge the digital divide.

• **Institutionalized Funding:** Establish a dedicated, non-lapsable judicial infrastructure fund, potentially managed by an independent body, to ensure timely utilization of financial allocations.

• **Gender and Disability Inclusive Design:** Ensure all future court complexes are barrier-free and equipped with gender-segregated facilities.

In conclusion, robust judicial infrastructure is not a luxury but a fundamental prerequisite for the rule of law. Implementing the blueprint of the Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee is vital to ensure that Indian courts are efficient, inclusive, and capable of delivering timely justice.

Prelims practice questions

Q1. With reference to the Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee constituted in 2026, consider the following statements: 1. It was constituted by the President of India under Article 143 of the Constitution. 2. It is chaired by Supreme Court Judge Justice Aravind Kumar. 3. Its mandate includes suggesting measures for the computerisation of courts under the e-Courts initiative. Which of the statements given above are correct?

1. 1 and 2 only
2. 2 and 3 only
3. 1 and 3 only
4. 1, 2 and 3

Answer: B. Statement 1 is incorrect because the committee was constituted by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, not by the President. Statements 2 and 3 are correct as per the news report, which highlights that the committee is chaired by Supreme Court Judge Justice Aravind Kumar and is tasked with suggesting measures for court computerisation under the e-Courts initiative.

Q2. Which of the following constitutional provisions directly support the mandate of providing adequate judicial infrastructure and free legal aid in India? 1. Article 21 2. Article 39A 3. Article 50 Select the correct answer using the code given below:

1. 1 and 2 only
2. 2 and 3 only
3. 1 and 3 only
4. 1, 2 and 3

Answer: D. All three articles are highly relevant. Article 21 guarantees the right to a speedy trial as part of the right to life. Article 39A (Directive Principles) mandates the State to secure equal justice and free legal aid. Article 50 directs the State to take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive, emphasizing the independent and robust functioning of the judicial branch, which requires independent infrastructure.

Q3. Consider the following statements regarding the funding of judicial infrastructure in India: 1. The Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary is implemented by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. 2. The Union Budget 2026-27 witnessed an increase in the financial allocation for the Ministry of Law and Justice compared to the previous year. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

1. 1 only
2. 2 only
3. Both 1 and 2
4. Neither 1 nor 2

Answer: D. Statement 1 is incorrect because the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary is implemented by the Department of Justice under the Ministry of Law and Justice. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Union Budget 2026-27 reduced the allocation for the Ministry of Law and Justice to ₹4,509.06 crore, down from ₹4,998.24 crore in the previous year.

Revision flashcards

• Who chaired the Judicial Infrastructure Advisory Committee constituted in May 2026? Supreme Court Judge, Justice Aravind Kumar.
• Which constitutional article mandates the State to provide free legal aid and ensure equal justice? Article 39A (Directive Principles of State Policy).
• What was the budgetary allocation for the Ministry of Law and Justice in the 2026-27 Union Budget? ₹4,509.06 crore (a reduction from ₹4,998.24 crore in 2025-26).
• What is the primary objective of the e-Courts Mission Mode Project? To enable ICT development in the Indian judiciary, enhancing citizen-centric services and court productivity.
• Which body was proposed in 2021 by the Supreme Court to streamline judicial infrastructure funding, which faced federal hurdles? The National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India (NJIAI).