National Judicial Infrastructure Corporation (NJIC) — Proposal, Need & UPSC Notes

When a litigant walks into a sessions court in a small district, she is likely to encounter overcrowded corridors, missing signage, unusable washrooms, no creche, no accessible ramp, and a lawyer's waiting room that doubles as a storeroom. For decades, judicial infrastructure has been the least-discussed limb of judicial reform in India — overshadowed by appointments, pendency and collegium debates.

The National Judicial Infrastructure Corporation (NJIC) is a proposal first mooted by former Chief Justice N.V. Ramana in 2021 to create a dedicated body that builds, maintains and standardises court infrastructure across the country. Alongside, the idea of a National Court of Appeal (NCA) has been discussed to relieve the Supreme Court of its appellate burden. Both are key GS II themes on judicial reform.

The infrastructure problem

Successive State Judicial Infrastructure Committees and surveys by the Supreme Court's e-Committee have documented:

• Hundreds of subordinate court complexes without separate washrooms for women.
• A large proportion of District Court premises without barrier-free access for persons with disabilities.
• Inadequate digital infrastructure — unreliable electricity, patchy internet and legacy hardware.
• Overcrowded courtrooms shared by multiple judicial officers.
• No designated waiting rooms for litigants, witnesses or women victims.
• A chronic shortage of residential accommodation for judicial officers in smaller districts.

The existing framework — Central Sector Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for the Judiciary — runs on a Centre-State cost-sharing pattern. States often under-utilise allocations, funds lapse, and no single body owns end-to-end accountability.

Why NJIC was proposed

The CJI's proposal for an NJIC sought to end this fragmentation. Its key features, as outlined:

• Autonomous statutory body with the Chief Justice of India as Patron-in-Chief.
• Central and State-level structures with judges, lawyers, architects and administrators.
• Dedicated mandate to plan, fund, construct, upgrade and maintain court complexes.
• Interdisciplinary governance — bringing together judiciary, executive and domain experts.
• Long-term, standards-driven planning instead of year-on-year fund releases.

The intent was not to replace existing committees but to give court infrastructure a single accountable owner with a dedicated budget line.

Concerns around NJIC

While the judiciary welcomed the idea, the executive raised several concerns:

As of 2024-26, NJIC remains a proposal under discussion — no enabling legislation has been passed.

The National Court of Appeal (NCA) debate

Separately, the idea of a National Court of Appeal has gained traction among legal scholars and former judges. The proposal stems from a simple statistical reality: the Supreme Court, originally conceived as a constitutional court under Article 145(3), now spends the bulk of its time deciding routine appeals.

The transformation

• In the 1950s, 70-80 judgments a year were delivered by Constitution Benches of five or more judges ruling on substantial questions of interpretation.
• Today, this number has dropped to 10-12 per year.
• Most judges sit in two- or three-judge benches handling a flood of SLPs (Special Leave Petitions) — bail matters, service appeals, tax disputes, film bans, and allegations of police misuse.

The Law Commission and VP Naidu proposals

• In its 229th Report (2009), the Law Commission of India recommended splitting the Supreme Court into a Constitution Bench at Delhi and four Cassation Benches — at Delhi, Chennai/Hyderabad, Kolkata and Mumbai — to hear appeals.
• In 2021, the then Vice-President M. Venkaiah Naidu publicly endorsed the idea of regional benches.

Why an NCA is needed

• Article 145(3) conceived the Supreme Court as a constitutional court, but appellate work has crowded out this role.
• Geographical access is limited by Delhi-centric location (Article 39A mandates equal access to justice).
• An NCA can filter cases so that only constitutional and federal issues reach the Supreme Court.
• International trends support this model — France, Italy and several civil law jurisdictions have Cour de Cassation systems.

Demerits and concerns

• The aura of the Supreme Court as the apex court may decline.
• Requires a constitutional amendment (Article 130 allows the Supreme Court to sit only at Delhi unless CJI with President's approval specifies otherwise).
• Significant questions around the appointment, strength and composition of NCA benches.
• Risk of additional litigation layer and further delay.

Complementary reforms

Whether or not NJIC and NCA materialise, a set of complementary reforms has been recommended:

• Fast Track Courts — already operational for heinous crimes against women and children; extend to commercial disputes and MPs/MLAs cases.
• Family Courts and Commercial Courts — expansion under the Commercial Courts Act 2015.
• ICT capability building — live streaming, e-filing, virtual hearings (institutionalised during the pandemic).
• ADR integration — the Mediation Act 2023 enables pre-litigation mediation.
• Lok Adalats — periodic mass disposal through National Lok Adalats (held quarterly).
• Uniform data methodology — the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) provides standardised metrics.

Latest developments (2024-26)

• The Ninth National e-Courts Mission Mode Project (Phase III) was approved by the Union Cabinet in 2023 with an outlay of around Rs 7,210 crore — a significant jump that will fund digital and physical infrastructure.
• Live streaming of Constitution Bench hearings became routine from 2022 onwards; all major benches now have YouTube archives.
• The Supreme Court moved to a paperless Rainbow courtroom model with smart displays and digital case files.
• The Gujarat High Court and Kerala High Court have published model infrastructure blueprints that may inform NJIC standards.
• Updated context: The Union Law Ministry and Supreme Court continue bilateral discussions on NJIC; as of late 2025, the NJIC Bill has not been introduced in Parliament. Several States have, however, set up State Judicial Infrastructure Authorities with interdisciplinary membership.

UPSC relevance

For Prelims, remember:

• Article 130 — seat of the Supreme Court (Delhi, unless otherwise specified by CJI with President's approval).
• Article 145(3) — minimum five judges for substantial constitutional questions.
• Article 39A (DPSP) — equal justice and free legal aid.
• 229th Law Commission Report (2009) — recommended Cassation Benches.

For Mains (GS II), structure answers around four axes: infrastructure deficit, appellate overload, fiscal federalism of judicial funding, and constitutional separation of powers. Typical questions link:

• Court infrastructure with Article 21 access-to-justice rights.
• NCA proposal with the basic structure doctrine (does relocating appellate work dilute the SC's character?).
• Tech reforms with the Digital India and ease of doing business agenda.

In essays, NJIC is a useful illustration of how administrative reform requires institutional design, not just budgetary allocation. It demonstrates the gap between a diagnosis (poor infrastructure) and a workable governance mechanism — a recurring UPSC theme.