<<Previous Table of Content Next>>

Part One

Chapter 2

Figure 1

Age » 15

Figure 2

Gender » 15

Figure 3

Education » 16

Figure 4

Occupation » 16

Figure 5

Religion » 17

Figure 6

Caste » 17

Figure 7

Annual Income » 17

Figure 8

Where People Go for Information about Their Dispute » 18

Figure 9

Whom People Would Not Approach if They Had a Dispute » 18

Figure 10

Police Complaints » 19

Figure 11

FIRs Filed during the Course of the Dispute » 20

Figure 12

Reasons for Not Registering the FIR — Based on the Nature of Dispute » 20

Figure 13

Disputes in the Last Five Years » 21

Figure 14

Nature of Disputes Faced in the Last Five Years » 22

Figure 15

Nature of Land Disputes » 22

Figure 16

Income of People with Disputes Involving Agricultural and Non-Agricultural Land » 23

Figure 17

Disputes Faced by People of Different Religions » 24

Figure 18

Religion Matrix of Survey Respondents against their Opposite Party » 24

Figure 19

Resolution of the Dispute » 25

Figure 20

Disputes that People Do Not Want to Resolve » 26

Figure 21

Reasons for Not Resolving the Dispute: Tamil Nadu, Bihar, and Punjab » 26

Figure 22

Caste-wise Distribution of Respondents Who Did Not Want to Resolve Their Dispute » 27

Figure 23

Resolution of Disputes: Court and Non-court Mechanisms » 28

Figure 24

Reasons for Not Going to Court » 28

Figure 25

Non-court Methods People Tried » 29

Figure 26

Non-court Methods That Helped Resolve the Dispute » 29

Figure 27

Use of Non-court Methods in Resolving Crimes » 30

Figure 28

Nature of Disputes » 31

Figure 29

Problems Resulting from the Dispute » 31

Figure 30

Problems Faced by People Going to Court: Top Four States » 32

Figure 31

Problems Faced by People Who Used Non-court Mechanisms: Top Three States » 32

Figure 32

Previous Court Experience and Impact on Use of Courts » 33

Figure 33

Previous Non-court Experience and Impact on Use of Courts » 33

Figure 34

Previous Court Experience and Impact on Use of Non-court Methods » 34

Figure 35

Previous Non-court Experience and Impact on Use of Non-court Mechanisms » 34

Figure 36

Prior Experience of Respondents Who Went to Court » 35

Figure 37

Prior Experience of Respondents Who Used Non-court Methods » 35

Figure 38

Costs of Participating in the Dispute Resolution Process » 36

Figure 39

Average Cost of Participating in the Dispute Resolution Process » 36

Figure 40

Daily Cost of Attending Proceedings » 37

Figure 41

Experience with Bribes » 37

Chapter 5

Figure 1

Organogram of Legal Services Authorities and Committees » 54

Figure 2

Subordinate Judiciary Pendency, Judge Strength, and Legal Service Officials » 58

Chapter 6

Figure 1

Percentage of Undertrial Prisoners (2001–2015) » 68

Figure 2

Occupancy Rate in Prisons (2001–2015) » 69

Figure 3

Rates of Arrest » 72

Figure 4

Number of Undertrial Prisoners Released (2006–2015) » 73

Part Two

Chapter 1

Figure 1

Summary of the DAKSH Database » 92

Figure 2

Average Pendency in All High Courts and Subordinate Courts » 92

Figure 3

Number of Pending Cases in Subordinate Courts of the States and Union Territories » 93

Figure 4

Number of Pending Cases in Subordinate Courts of Districts in Karnataka » 94

Figure 5

Average Pendency in High Courts » 95

Figure 6

Average Pendency in Subordinate Courts » 96

Figure 7

Average Pendency of Civil, Criminal, and Writ Cases in High Courts » 97

Figure 8

Average Pendency of Civil and Criminal Cases in Subordinate Courts » 98

Figure 9

Proportion of Pending Cases in High Courts » 99

Figure 10

Proportion of Pending Cases in Subordinate Courts » 100

Figure 11

Proportion of Civil and Criminal Cases in Subordinate Courts » 100

Figure 12

Judicial Workload of Subordinate Courts Categorised by Types of Cases » 101

Figure 13

Average Pendency and Disposal in Subordinate Courts » 101

Figure 14

Stage-wise Distribution of Hearings in Cases in Subordinate Courts » 102

Figure 15

Time Taken from First Hearing to Evidence in Subordinate Courts » 103

Figure 16

Time Taken from Evidence to Final Judgment in Subordinate Courts » 103

Figure 17

Factors Affecting Pendency » 104

Figure 18

Relationship between Case Clearance Rate and Judges’ Strength » 105

Figure 19

Case Clearance Rates in Civil and Criminal Cases » 106

Figure 20

Percentage of Population Involved in Civil and Criminal Litigation in India » 107

Figure 21

Impact of Gross Domestic Product on Civil Litigation » 108

Figure 22

Average Pendency and Disposal of Execution Cases » 109

Figure 23

Average Pendency of Execution Cases » 109

Part Three

Chapter 1

Figure 1

State-wise Representation of Average Pendency of Cheque Dishonour Cases » 129

Figure 2

Districts with Highest Average Pendency » 130

Figure 3

Districts with Lowest Average Pendency » 130

Figure 4

Current Stages of Cases » 131

Chapter 2

Figure 1

Percentage of Civil and Criminal Cases in Subordinate Courts » 138

Figure 2

Number of Cases Pending in the Chosen Courts » 139

Figure 3

Distribution of Cases Pending with Judges » 140

Figure 4

Comparison of Cases Pending with the CJM/CMM » 141

Figure 5

Comparison of Cases Pending with CMM Calcutta with other States/UTs » 142

Figure 6

Pending Cases Filed Prior to 2000 » 143

Figure 7

Average Pendency of Certain Case Types » 144

Figure 8

Case Clearance Rate » 145

Chapter 3

Figure 1

New Cases Filed in KAT between 2012 and 2017 » 152

Figure 2

Number of Cases Disposed by KAT between 2013 and 2017 » 153

Figure 3

Cases Pending in KAT between 2012 and 2017 » 154

Figure 4

Disposal Rate of KAT between 2013 and 2017 » 155

Figure 5

Percentage of Cases Appealed from KAT in 2014 by Case Type » 157

Figure 6

Types of Challenges to KAT’s Orders » 158

Figure 7

Grounds for Appeal from KAT to High Court of Karnataka in 2014 » 159

Figure 8

Grounds for Appeal in Orders from KAT in 2014 Reversed by High Court of Karnataka » 160

Chapter 4

Figure 1

Comparison of Ratio of Government to Assessee Appeals in the High Courts of Karnataka and Gujarat » 168

Figure 2

Comparison of Ratio of Government to Assessee Appeals in the High Courts of Karnataka and Gujarat » 170

Chapter 5

Figure 1

California’s Court System » 175

Figure 2

Ten-year Trends in Criminal Filings » 180

Figure 3

Felony Dispositions for Fiscal Year 2016–2017 by Type of Disposition » 183

Part Four

Chapter 4

Figure 1

Average Supreme Court Tenure » 212

Figure 2

Average Supreme Court Tenure and Parent High Courts » 213

Figure 3

Average Supreme Court Tenure and Appointing Authority » 214

Figure 4

Average Supreme Court Tenure: Percentage of Reduction » 215

Figure 5

Average Supreme Court Tenure: Percentage of Increase » 215

Figure 6

Average High Court Tenure of Supreme Court Judges: Parent High Court » 217

Figure 7

Average High Court Tenure of Supreme Court Judges: Appointing Authority » 218

Figure 8

Average High Court Tenure of Supreme Court Judges: Percentage of Increase » 218

Figure 9

Average High Court Tenure of Supreme Court Judges: Percentage of Reduction » 219

Figure 10

Continuous Uninterrupted Period of Representation of Parent High Courts (in Years) » 221

Figure 11

Period of Non-representation of Parent High Courts in Supreme Court (in Days) » 221

Figure 12

Percentage of Non-representation of Parent High Courts in Supreme Court » 222

Chapter 5

Figure 1

Budget Allocation for DOLJ of Maharashtra, 2016–2017 » 227

Figure 2

Budget Allocation for District and Sessions Courts of Maharashtra, 2016–2017 » 228