It is no longer news that the Supreme Court is overloaded with cases. But what is interesting is that many of them are minor cases. As the Supreme Court is the court of last resort, it has to hear writ petitions, as well as appeals when litigants are not satisfied with the verdicts given by the lower courts. For years the pressure of the cases has been building up in the Supreme Court as well as in the lower courts, except in those in certain remote areas which have very few cases mainly because of the Maoist insurgency. So most of the cases have remained pending for years even as the new cases continue to mount. There are three tiers of the judiciary in Nepal—the district court, the appellate court, and the Supreme Court—besides several judicial tribunals. During the last fiscal year, 67.25 per cent of the cases heard by all the courts taken together were of minor nature, which involved a maximum punishment of three years’ jail term, or a fine of up to Rs. 3,000, or both.

Unless something effective is done, justice in future will be delayed even longer as the new cases pile up on top of the mountains of old cases. At present, the Supreme Court is burdened with 22,000 major and minor cases, besides hundreds of writ petitions. According to the Supreme Court’s Annual Report 2060/61 BS, 28.45 per cent of the civil cases registered with the courts relate to disputes between landlord and tenant; family disputes and personal transactions constitute other major categories of lawsuit. The problem is not new. But never has any effective solution been attempted to settle cases quickly or to introduce mechanisms whereby the apex court is relieved of minor cases. Incidentally, the judiciary is the most liberal among the branches of the state in declaring public holidays.

Some legal experts suggest delegating the authority of final settlement to the lower courts to reduce the burden of minor cases at the Supreme Court. This, however, calls for changes in statutes. Apart from this, the courts will have to improve their level of efficiency in delivering justice. To contribute to workload reduction, additional judges may have to be appointed. No less important is the need for the courts to win the confidence of the public in their judgements. Under the five-year plan of the Supreme Court, certain time periods have been fixed for the settlement of cases. But the more important part involves taking steps to make sure that the plan is implemented. People tend to expect from the judiciary something they could not get from the executive or the legislature. But general opinion seems to be that the country’s judiciary, which has been made independent by the Constitution, has proved no better.