Supreme Court strength increased to 38 judges after President's nod

President Draupadi Murmu approved the Union Cabinet's decision to increase Supreme Court judge strength from 34 to 38. The move, aimed at tackling case pendency, has been widely welcomed by the legal fraternity as a timely step.

New Delhi [India], May 17 (ANI): President Draupadi Murmu has approved the Union Cabinet's decision to increase the strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38 judges, said Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal on Sunday.

In an X post, Meghwal said, "The President is pleased to increase the Judge strength of the Supreme Court from 33 to 37 Judges (Excluding the Chief Justice of India) by promulgating The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026, which has further amended the "Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956".

The Union Cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on May 5 approved the proposal for introducing The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill, 2026 in Parliament to amend The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956 for increasing the number of Judges of the Supreme Court of India by 4 from the present 33 to 37 (excluding the Chief Justice of India).

Legal Fraternity Welcomes Move to Tackle Pendency

It has been widely welcomed by members of the legal fraternity, who described it as a timely step to deal with rising pendency and growing litigation before the apex court.

President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, said the demand for increasing the number of Supreme Court judges had existed for a long time due to the steady rise in filings before the apex court. He said that although the disposal rate of Supreme Court judges has been commendable, the heavy volume of cases requires more judges.

Singh also highlighted the need for matching infrastructure and expressed hope that a part of the new Supreme Court building would become operational by the end of this year. According to him, the Court can comfortably accommodate 38 judges and may even require around 50 judges in the coming years once the entire new building becomes functional.

Senior Advocate Sacchin Puri, Vice President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association, termed the decision a "positive and much-needed step." He said increasing the strength of judges was the need of the hour and would help in the speedy disposal of pending matters. He added that the move would benefit litigants as well as the legal community.

Advocate Juhi Arora Gupta, known for her legal expertise and court practice, described the move as a crucial step for improving judicial efficiency and ensuring speedy justice. She said the growing number and complexity of cases had made it difficult for the present strength of judges to manage matters efficiently.

Experts Stress Need for Broader Judicial Reforms

Advocate Sumit Gehlot, a Supreme Court lawyer known for his views on constitutional and judicial issues, said the move was welcome but noted that merely increasing the number of judges would not fully solve the problem of pendency. Referring to the nearly 95,000 pending cases in the Supreme Court, he stressed the need for structural reforms and better case management systems alongside increasing judicial strength.

Eminent lawyer Hemant Shah also said that while the increase in judges may help reduce backlog, it cannot be the only solution. He pointed out that several judges are set to retire in 2026, which may again impact pendency. Shah further suggested that the government should work towards reducing unnecessary litigation.

However, former Union Law Secretary PK Malhotra said that simply increasing the number of judges may not bring major judicial reforms. He suggested that the government should consider setting up regional Courts of Appeal so that the Supreme Court can focus mainly on constitutional matters.

Overall, while legal experts have largely welcomed the Centre's decision, many believe that increasing the number of judges must be accompanied by wider judicial reforms to effectively tackle delays and pendency in the justice delivery system. (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)