'Time To Reinforce Predictability In Judicial Approach' : CJI Suggests National Judicial Policy To Avoid Divergence Across Benches

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Wednesday said predictability in judicial approach must be reinforced across courts in the country, and avoidable divergence that may arise because there are twenty-five High Courts and multiple benches of the Supreme Court, must be avoided.

“It is high time we minimise unpredictability and avoidable divergence that may arise simply because there are twenty-five High Courts or multiple benches of the Supreme Court. Justice cannot resemble a set of instruments producing harmonious notes in isolation but discordant sounds when played together. Instead, we must strive for a judicial symphony – one rhythm, expressed in many voices and languages, but guided by a common constitutional score”, he said.

Speaking at the Constitution Day function organised in the Supreme Court, he suggested that a uniform national judicial policy could be one way to encourage coherence across jurisdictions,

“The time is also ripe for us to reinforce predictability in our judicial approach. One constructive way forward, in my opinion, can be the evolution of a uniform, national judicial policy – an institutional framework that encourages coherence across jurisdictions so that our courts speak with clarity and consistency”, he said.

He highlighted that access to justice continues to remain out of reach for many people. Liberties become ornamental when remedies are inaccessible and constitutional guarantees lose their meaning in the lives of ordinary citizens, he said.

He said Articles 32 and 39A make access to justice explicit and indispensable. He added that the duty to safeguard access to justice rests with the Supreme Court and the High Courts. “Our framers recognised that a Constitution which proclaims rights without providing avenues to enforce them may not be a true testament of Justice”, he highlighted.

The CJI said there is still a gap between the constitutional vision and the experience of many people who face barriers of cost, language, distance and delay.

“If access to justice is our moral and constitutional North Star, then predictability, affordability, and timeliness form its core supports. Despite that, when we look closely at the functioning of our Justice Delivery System, there is still a disquieting gap between this constitutional vision and the experiences of many – particularly those on the margins – for whom the ideal of access to justice remains elusive due to exorbitant cost, language, distance, and delay. These barriers weaken the very overarching goal we seek to protect and, in doing so, magnify existing inequalities”, he said.

Infrastructure, he pointed out, is the first step in addressing this gap. Judicial infrastructure, he said, does not mean physical facilities alone but also technological, administrative and human systems that support justice delivery.

On dispute resolution, the CJI described mediation as a central feature of contemporary jurisprudence. Mediation resolves disputes through cooperation rather than adversarial victory, he remarked, and is cost-effective, participatory and humane.

“When supported by well-designed mediation centres, trained professionals, structured procedures, and robust digital platforms, mediation has the potential to reshape our dispute-resolution culture. It can ease pendency, enhance public confidence, and repair relationships in ways that litigation seldom permits. Above all, it brings justice closer to the people by offering a process that is less intimidating, more efficient, and genuinely responsive to individual needs”, he highlighted.

He referred to the “Mediation for the Nation” drive and said it attracted significant participation to resolve pending matrimonial, motor accident and commercial disputes. He also highlighted the development of a forty-plus-hour online mediation training module to equip participants with relevant skills.

He said arbitration and other forms of alternative dispute resolution are part of the same architecture. India, he said, has established world-class arbitration centres, adopted international best practices and ensured consistent judicial support for arbitral autonomy. This, he noted, has positioned the country as a preferred destination for international dispute resolution.

Calling technology the connective tissue of the justice delivery system, he said digital filing, virtual hearings, online transcript software, multilingual platforms and modern case-management tools have already begun to democratise access. At the same time, he cautioned that technology must be deployed with sensitivity so that people without resources or internet connectivity are not excluded.

He also spoke about international cooperation in the justice sector and said the comity of courts should act as a conduit for shared learning, mutual strengthening and collective advancement rather than remain an abstract diplomatic idea.

Looking back on seventy-six years of the Constitution, the CJI described it as the stabilising force that has allowed change without chaos and growth without drift. He noted that the judiciary has evolved to ensure that justice eludes no one through the expansion of Article 21, giving new meaning to Fundamental Duties and Directive Principles and enabling aggrieved and public-spirited individuals to directly approach constitutional courts.

He concluded by stating that the strength of a constitutional democracy lies not in the proclamation of rights but in the capacity to secure them.

“Let us continue the work of building a justice system that resonates with every individual who seeks its protection and remains faithful to the principles enshrined in our Constitution. Let us reaffirm that the strength of a constitutional democracy lies not merely in its proclamation of rights, but in its steadfast capacity to secure them”, he concluded.