GetNyay Data · India court pendency and judge vacancy archive
India's High Courts have 7,942 pending cases for every working judge. 304 of 1,122 judge posts are vacant.
India court pendency data, captured every month from the National Judicial Data Grid and set against the Department of Justice’s own judge-strength statements — for every High Court and for the district courts of every State and Union Territory. The Grid keeps no history. This archive does.
What the numbers say
Four figures first, each traceable to a dated government source listed at the foot of this page, then every headline figure in one table you can copy.
Every headline figure, with the date it carries
| Measure | Figure | Date the figure carries | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cases pending, district and subordinate courts | 5,20,68,932 | 14 September 2026 | [2] |
| Cases pending, High Courts | 64,96,989 | 14 September 2026 | [1] |
| District cases more than one year old | 3,13,08,909 (60.13%) | 14 September 2026 | [2] |
| District cases more than ten years old | 47,55,213 | 14 September 2026 | [2] |
| High Court cases more than ten years old | 14,85,720 | 14 September 2026 | [1] |
| District cases with no next date fixed | 43,08,460 | 14 September 2026 | [2] |
| District cases dated more than three months ahead | 48,13,243 | 14 September 2026 | [2] |
| High Court judges: sanctioned / working / vacant | 1,122 / 818 / 304 | 1 September 2026 | [15] |
| Supreme Court judges: sanctioned / working / vacant | 38 / 34 / 4 | 1 September 2026 | [15] |
| Pending cases per working High Court judge (GetNyay calculation) | 7,942.53 | 14 September 2026 ÷ 1 September 2026 | [1] |
How many cases are pending in Indian courts?
On 14 September 2026 the National Judicial Data Grid showed 5,20,68,932 cases pending in India's district and subordinate courts and 64,96,989 in the 25 High Courts — 5.85 crore together. The High Courts had 818 working judges against 1,122 sanctioned posts on 1 September 2026: 7,942.53 pending cases for every working judge.
The total leaves out the Supreme Court, which the Grid reports separately and this archive does not capture. This is the archive's first capture (September 2026), so there is no earlier month to compare it with yet.
Key takeaways
- Rajasthan has the highest ratio of pending cases to working judges, at 18,146.03 — 2.28 times the all-High-Court figure of 7,942.53. Madhya Pradesh follows at 13,011.87.
- 304 of 1,122 High Court judge posts were vacant on 1 September 2026 (27.09%). Only Meghalaya had no vacancy.
- 60.13% of the 5.20 crore cases pending in district and subordinate courts are more than a year old, and 47,55,213 are more than ten years old.
- 43,08,460 district-court cases have no next hearing date fixed at all, and another 48,13,243 have been given a date more than three months away.
- This is the first capture of a monthly archive. The National Judicial Data Grid keeps no history, so from October 2026 each capture will show how these figures moved — something no public source records today.
Finding 1 — pending cases per working judge, High Court by High Court
Across all 25 High Courts there were 7,942.53 pending cases for every working judge. The spread between courts is wide: Rajasthan stood at 18,146.03, while among courts with more than 4 working judges the lowest was Gauhati at 2,730.54.
What this ratio measures, and what it does not
It divides a court’s pending caseload by the number of judges it had working. It is a measure of pressure on a court, not of anyone’s work: it says nothing about how fast any judge disposes of cases, how complex the cases are, or how a bench is organised, and nothing about any individual judge. A high ratio means a large queue relative to the judges available to hear it.
Pending cases per working judge, by High Court
Grid pendency on 14 September 2026 ÷ working judges in the statement as on 1 September 2026 · ranked highest to lowest · GetNyay calculation
Rajasthan's ratio is 2.28 times the all-High-Court figure. 9 of the 25 courts are above it. The paler bars are the 4 courts with 4 or fewer working judges, whose ratios rest on too few judges and cases to compare with a large court.
Show these figures as a table
| High Court | Pending | Working judges | Cases per working judge |
|---|---|---|---|
| High Court of Rajasthan | 7,07,695 | 39 | 18,146.03 |
| High Court of Madhya Pradesh | 4,94,451 | 38 | 13,011.87 |
| Allahabad High Court | 12,52,213 | 107 | 11,702.93 |
| Orissa High Court | 1,73,432 | 17 | 10,201.88 |
| High Court for the State of Telangana | 2,44,449 | 27 | 9,053.67 |
| Bombay High Court | 6,48,519 | 75 | 8,646.92 |
| Madras High Court | 5,61,098 | 66 | 8,501.48 |
| High Court of Andhra Pradesh | 2,54,248 | 30 | 8,474.93 |
| High Court of Uttarakhand | 64,102 | 8 | 8,012.75 |
| High Court of Himachal Pradesh | 1,05,276 | 15 | 7,018.40 |
| High Court of Kerala | 2,44,149 | 36 | 6,781.92 |
| High Court of Chhattisgarh | 72,829 | 11 | 6,620.82 |
| High Court of Punjab and Haryana | 4,21,378 | 64 | 6,584.03 |
| High Court of Karnataka | 3,35,610 | 54 | 6,215.00 |
| High Court of Jharkhand | 74,226 | 13 | 5,709.69 |
| High Court of Gujarat | 1,76,765 | 33 | 5,356.52 |
| Patna High Court | 2,21,369 | 43 | 5,148.12 |
| Calcutta High Court | 1,97,075 | 49 | 4,021.94 |
| High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh | 44,963 | 12 | 3,746.92 |
| High Court of Delhi | 1,27,231 | 44 | 2,891.61 |
| Gauhati High Court | 65,533 | 24 | 2,730.54 |
| High Court of Manipur | 6,385 | 3 | 2,128.33 |
| High Court of Meghalaya | 1,973 | 4 | 493.25 |
| High Court of Tripura | 1,681 | 4 | 420.25 |
| High Court of Sikkim | 339 | 2 | 169.50 |
Pending: National Judicial Data Grid, High Court dashboard, captured 14 September 2026. Working judges: Department of Justice statement as on 1 September 2026. The file cases-per-judge-timeseries.csv carries both dates and both source links for every row.
Why the smallest courts are set apart
Manipur, Meghalaya, Tripura and Sikkim each had 4 or fewer working judges. With so few judges, one appointment or retirement moves the ratio by a quarter or more, and their caseloads are a small fraction of a large court’s. Their ratios are shown and kept in every file, but they are not comparable with courts that have dozens of judges, and this page draws no conclusion from them.
The two halves carry two dates
Pendency is captured on one date; judge strength comes from the Department statement dated on or before it. This month they are 13 days apart.
Vacancy rate against cases per working judge
Each dot is a High Court · dashed lines mark the all-High-Court figures · hollow dots are the smallest courts
Courts to the right of the vertical line have a larger share of their posts empty than the High Courts as a whole (27.09%); courts above the horizontal line have more pending cases per working judge than the whole (7,942.53). 5 of the larger courts are above both lines. Vacancies are one reason a ratio is high, not the only one: the size of the caseload a court inherited matters as much.
Show these figures as a table
| High Court | Vacancy rate | Cases per working judge |
|---|---|---|
| High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh | 52.00% | 3,746.92 |
| High Court of Chhattisgarh | 50.00% | 6,620.82 |
| Orissa High Court | 48.48% | 10,201.88 |
| High Court of Jharkhand | 48.00% | 5,709.69 |
| High Court of Manipur | 40.00% | 2,128.33 |
| High Court of Gujarat | 36.54% | 5,356.52 |
| High Court for the State of Telangana | 35.71% | 9,053.67 |
| High Court of Sikkim | 33.33% | 169.50 |
| Allahabad High Court | 33.13% | 11,702.93 |
| Calcutta High Court | 31.94% | 4,021.94 |
| High Court of Madhya Pradesh | 28.30% | 13,011.87 |
| High Court of Uttarakhand | 27.27% | 8,012.75 |
| High Court of Delhi | 26.67% | 2,891.61 |
| High Court of Punjab and Haryana | 24.71% | 6,584.03 |
| High Court of Kerala | 23.40% | 6,781.92 |
| High Court of Rajasthan | 22.00% | 18,146.03 |
| Bombay High Court | 20.21% | 8,646.92 |
| Gauhati High Court | 20.00% | 2,730.54 |
| High Court of Tripura | 20.00% | 420.25 |
| High Court of Andhra Pradesh | 18.92% | 8,474.93 |
| Patna High Court | 18.87% | 5,148.12 |
| High Court of Karnataka | 12.90% | 6,215.00 |
| Madras High Court | 12.00% | 8,501.48 |
| High Court of Himachal Pradesh | 11.76% | 7,018.40 |
| High Court of Meghalaya | 0.00% | 493.25 |
Both figures for each court from cases-per-judge-timeseries.csv. The vacancy rate is vacant posts ÷ sanctioned posts in the Department statement.
All 25 High Courts — sort any column
25 of 25 High Courts
| High Court of Rajasthan | 7,07,695 | 39 | 50 | 11 | 22.00% | 18,146.03 | — first capture |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High Court of Madhya Pradesh | 4,94,451 | 38 | 53 | 15 | 28.30% | 13,011.87 | — first capture |
| Allahabad High Court | 12,52,213 | 107 | 160 | 53 | 33.13% | 11,702.93 | — first capture |
| Orissa High Court | 1,73,432 | 17 | 33 | 16 | 48.48% | 10,201.88 | — first capture |
| High Court for the State of Telangana | 2,44,449 | 27 | 42 | 15 | 35.71% | 9,053.67 | — first capture |
| Bombay High Court | 6,48,519 | 75 | 94 | 19 | 20.21% | 8,646.92 | — first capture |
| Madras High Court | 5,61,098 | 66 | 75 | 9 | 12.00% | 8,501.48 | — first capture |
| High Court of Andhra Pradesh | 2,54,248 | 30 | 37 | 7 | 18.92% | 8,474.93 | — first capture |
| High Court of Uttarakhand | 64,102 | 8 | 11 | 3 | 27.27% | 8,012.75 | — first capture |
| High Court of Himachal Pradesh | 1,05,276 | 15 | 17 | 2 | 11.76% | 7,018.40 | — first capture |
| High Court of Kerala | 2,44,149 | 36 | 47 | 11 | 23.40% | 6,781.92 | — first capture |
| High Court of Chhattisgarh | 72,829 | 11 | 22 | 11 | 50.00% | 6,620.82 | — first capture |
| High Court of Punjab and Haryana | 4,21,378 | 64 | 85 | 21 | 24.71% | 6,584.03 | — first capture |
| High Court of Karnataka | 3,35,610 | 54 | 62 | 8 | 12.90% | 6,215.00 | — first capture |
| High Court of Jharkhand | 74,226 | 13 | 25 | 12 | 48.00% | 5,709.69 | — first capture |
| High Court of Gujarat | 1,76,765 | 33 | 52 | 19 | 36.54% | 5,356.52 | — first capture |
| Patna High Court | 2,21,369 | 43 | 53 | 10 | 18.87% | 5,148.12 | — first capture |
| Calcutta High Court | 1,97,075 | 49 | 72 | 23 | 31.94% | 4,021.94 | — first capture |
| High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh | 44,963 | 12 | 25 | 13 | 52.00% | 3,746.92 | — first capture |
| High Court of Delhi | 1,27,231 | 44 | 60 | 16 | 26.67% | 2,891.61 | — first capture |
| Gauhati High Court | 65,533 | 24 | 30 | 6 | 20.00% | 2,730.54 | — first capture |
| High Court of Manipursmall court | 6,385 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 40.00% | 2,128.33 | — first capture |
| High Court of Meghalayasmall court | 1,973 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0.00% | 493.25 | — first capture |
| High Court of Tripurasmall court | 1,681 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 20.00% | 420.25 | — first capture |
| High Court of Sikkimsmall court | 339 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 33.33% | 169.50 | — first capture |
| All High Courts | 64,96,989 | 818 | 1,122 | 304 | 27.09% | 7,942.53 | — first capture |
The change column fills from the October 2026 capture onwards. It is blank now because this is the archive's first reading of the Grid, not because nothing changed.
Finding 2 — High Court judge vacancies over the last year
The Department of Justice has published 12 statements between 1 September 2025 and 1 September 2026 that are still online. Across them, sanctioned High Court strength stayed at 1,122 posts while vacancies moved between 297 (1 December 2025) and 341 (1 July 2026).
High Court judge posts: sanctioned, working and vacant
Every Department of Justice statement in the archive, plotted on its own date · all High Courts together
- Sanctioned posts
- Judges working
- Posts vacant
On 1 September 2025 330 posts were vacant; on 1 September 2026, 304. The shaded bands are months in which no statement is online (October 2025, November 2025, January 2026); the line is broken across them rather than drawn through figures that were never published.
Show these figures as a table
| Statement as on | Sanctioned | Working | Vacant | Vacancy rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 September 2025 | 1,122 | 792 | 330 | 29.41% |
| 1 December 2025 | 1,122 | 825 | 297 | 26.47% |
| 24 December 2025 | 1,122 | 821 | 301 | 26.83% |
| 1 February 2026 | 1,122 | 814 | 308 | 27.45% |
| 1 March 2026 | 1,122 | 811 | 311 | 27.72% |
| 13 March 2026 | 1,122 | 806 | 316 | 28.16% |
| 1 April 2026 | 1,122 | 801 | 321 | 28.61% |
| 1 May 2026 | 1,122 | 797 | 325 | 28.97% |
| 1 June 2026 | 1,122 | 789 | 333 | 29.68% |
| 1 July 2026 | 1,122 | 781 | 341 | 30.39% |
| 1 August 2026 | 1,122 | 781 | 341 | 30.39% |
| 1 September 2026 | 1,122 | 818 | 304 | 27.09% |
Department of Justice statements, each linked under Sources. 3 statements (24 December 2025, 1 July 2026, 1 August 2026) fail their own arithmetic somewhere in the table; their totals are plotted as printed and flagged in the files.
Why some months are missing and some appear twice
The Department does not publish on a fixed day. 2 statements are dated in the middle of a month (24 December 2025 and 13 March 2026), alongside the usual first-of-the-month statements. No statement is online for October 2025, November 2025 and January 2026. Those months are left empty on the chart and in the files. Nothing has been estimated to fill them.
The Supreme Court
On 1 September 2026 the Supreme Court had 34 judges working against 38 sanctioned posts, the Chief Justice of India included. The series records the sanctioned strength rising from 34 in the statement as on 1 May 2026 to 38 in the statement as on 1 June 2026 — an increase in the number of posts, which is why the Court’s vacancies rose in the same statement without any judge leaving.[15]
Supreme Court: sanctioned and working
Every statement in the archive, on its own date
- Sanctioned
- Working
4 of 38 posts vacant on 1 September 2026 — a vacancy rate of 10.53%.
Show these figures as a table
| Statement as on | Sanctioned | Working | Vacant |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 September 2025 | 34 | 34 | 0 |
| 1 December 2025 | 34 | 33 | 1 |
| 24 December 2025 | 34 | 33 | 1 |
| 1 February 2026 | 34 | 33 | 1 |
| 1 March 2026 | 34 | 33 | 1 |
| 13 March 2026 | 34 | 33 | 1 |
| 1 April 2026 | 34 | 33 | 1 |
| 1 May 2026 | 34 | 32 | 2 |
| 1 June 2026 | 38 | 32 | 6 |
| 1 July 2026 | 38 | 35 | 3 |
| 1 August 2026 | 38 | 35 | 3 |
| 1 September 2026 | 38 | 34 | 4 |
The Department prints a total only for the Supreme Court, with no split into permanent and additional posts.
Share of posts vacant, by High Court
Statement as on 1 September 2026 · vacant ÷ sanctioned
J&K and Ladakh had the highest share of posts vacant, at 52.00%. Meghalaya had none.
Show these figures as a table
| Court | Sanctioned | Working | Vacant | Vacancy rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh | 25 | 12 | 13 | 52.00% |
| High Court of Chhattisgarh | 22 | 11 | 11 | 50.00% |
| Orissa High Court | 33 | 17 | 16 | 48.48% |
| High Court of Jharkhand | 25 | 13 | 12 | 48.00% |
| High Court of Manipur | 5 | 3 | 2 | 40.00% |
| High Court of Gujarat | 52 | 33 | 19 | 36.54% |
| High Court for the State of Telangana | 42 | 27 | 15 | 35.71% |
| High Court of Sikkim | 3 | 2 | 1 | 33.33% |
| Allahabad High Court | 160 | 107 | 53 | 33.13% |
| Calcutta High Court | 72 | 49 | 23 | 31.94% |
| High Court of Madhya Pradesh | 53 | 38 | 15 | 28.30% |
| High Court of Uttarakhand | 11 | 8 | 3 | 27.27% |
| High Court of Delhi | 60 | 44 | 16 | 26.67% |
| High Court of Punjab and Haryana | 85 | 64 | 21 | 24.71% |
| High Court of Kerala | 47 | 36 | 11 | 23.40% |
| High Court of Rajasthan | 50 | 39 | 11 | 22.00% |
| Bombay High Court | 94 | 75 | 19 | 20.21% |
| Gauhati High Court | 30 | 24 | 6 | 20.00% |
| High Court of Tripura | 5 | 4 | 1 | 20.00% |
| High Court of Andhra Pradesh | 37 | 30 | 7 | 18.92% |
| Patna High Court | 53 | 43 | 10 | 18.87% |
| High Court of Karnataka | 62 | 54 | 8 | 12.90% |
| Madras High Court | 75 | 66 | 9 | 12.00% |
| High Court of Himachal Pradesh | 17 | 15 | 2 | 11.76% |
| High Court of Meghalaya | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0.00% |
Vacancy rates computed from the statement's own sanctioned and vacant totals.
Judge strength on 1 September 2026, court by court
| Court | Sanctioned (perm. + addl.) | Working (perm. + addl.) | Vacant | Vacancy rate | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supreme Court of India | 38 | 34 | 4 | 10.53% | |
| Allahabad High Court | 160 (119 + 41) | 107 (107 + 0) | 53 | 33.13% | |
| Bombay High Court | 94 (71 + 23) | 75 (55 + 20) | 19 | 20.21% | |
| Calcutta High Court | 72 (54 + 18) | 49 (31 + 18) | 23 | 31.94% | |
| Gauhati High Court | 30 (22 + 8) | 24 (17 + 7) | 6 | 20.00% | |
| High Court for the State of Telangana | 42 (32 + 10) | 27 (23 + 4) | 15 | 35.71% | |
| High Court of Andhra Pradesh | 37 (28 + 9) | 30 (20 + 10) | 7 | 18.92% | |
| High Court of Chhattisgarh | 22 (17 + 5) | 11 (11 + 0) | 11 | 50.00% | |
| High Court of Delhi | 60 (45 + 15) | 44 (44 + 0) | 16 | 26.67% | |
| High Court of Gujarat | 52 (39 + 13) | 33 (33 + 0) | 19 | 36.54% | |
| High Court of Himachal Pradesh | 17 (13 + 4) | 15 (13 + 2) | 2 | 11.76% | |
| High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh | 25 (19 + 6) | 12 (12 + 0) | 13 | 52.00% | |
| High Court of Jharkhand | 25 (20 + 5) | 13 (13 + 0) | 12 | 48.00% | |
| High Court of Karnataka | 62 (47 + 15) | 54 (41 + 13) | 8 | 12.90% | |
| High Court of Kerala | 47 (35 + 12) | 36 (30 + 6) | 11 | 23.40% | |
| High Court of Madhya Pradesh | 53 (40 + 13) | 38 (33 + 5) | 15 | 28.30% | |
| High Court of Manipur | 5 (4 + 1) | 3 (3 + 0) | 2 | 40.00% | |
| High Court of Meghalaya | 4 (4 + 0) | 4 (4 + 0) | 0 | 0.00% | |
| High Court of Punjab and Haryana | 85 (64 + 21) | 64 (41 + 23) | 21 | 24.71% | |
| High Court of Rajasthan | 50 (38 + 12) | 39 (33 + 6) | 11 | 22.00% | |
| High Court of Sikkim | 3 (3 + 0) | 2 (2 + 0) | 1 | 33.33% | |
| High Court of Tripura | 5 (4 + 1) | 4 (4 + 0) | 1 | 20.00% | |
| High Court of Uttarakhand | 11 (9 + 2) | 8 (6 + 2) | 3 | 27.27% | |
| Madras High Court | 75 (56 + 19) | 66 (56 + 10) | 9 | 12.00% | flagged — see file |
| Orissa High Court | 33 (24 + 9) | 17 (17 + 0) | 16 | 48.48% | |
| Patna High Court | 53 (40 + 13) | 43 (39 + 4) | 10 | 18.87% | |
| All High Courts | 1,122 (847 + 275) | 818 (688 + 130) | 304 | 27.09% |
Permanent and additional posts are the two kinds of High Court judgeship. The Department prints a negative vacancy for one kind when more judges work against it than are sanctioned; the files keep it as printed. A flag means one of the archive’s checks found something to note in that row, such as a move of more than a quarter in working judges between statements; the reason is written in the file.
Finding 3 — how old the pending cases are
More than half the backlog in both tiers is over a year old: 60.13% of district-court cases and 71.84% of High Court cases. At the far end, 47,55,213 district-court cases and 14,85,720 High Court cases have been pending for more than ten years.
Pending cases by age, High Courts and district courts
Each bar is 100% of that group's pending cases · the Grid's five age brackets, youngest to oldest
- Under 1 year
- 1 to 3 years
- 3 to 5 years
- 5 to 10 years
- Over 10 years
22.88% of High Court cases fall in the oldest bracket against 9.13% in district courts; the youngest bracket, under a year, is 28.12% of High Court cases and 39.87% of district cases.
Show these figures as a table
| Group | Under 1 year | 1 to 3 years | 3 to 5 years | 5 to 10 years | Over 10 years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High Courts — civil | 12,36,338 | 8,24,875 | 5,14,651 | 9,48,258 | 9,91,895 |
| High Courts — criminal | 5,91,781 | 3,54,674 | 1,83,158 | 3,56,225 | 4,93,825 |
| High Courts — all | 18,25,996 | 11,79,549 | 6,97,809 | 13,04,483 | 14,85,720 |
| District — civil | 44,74,339 | 27,95,088 | 15,27,213 | 16,12,742 | 8,28,475 |
| District — criminal | 1,62,85,684 | 87,05,564 | 52,15,780 | 67,00,604 | 39,26,738 |
| District — all | 2,07,60,023 | 1,15,00,652 | 67,42,993 | 83,13,346 | 47,55,213 |
Shares are of the sum of the five brackets, which the Grid does not always make equal to its own pending total — see the note below.
| Age of pending case | High Courts | Share of High Court pendency | District and subordinate | Share of district pendency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Under 1 year | 18,25,996 | 28.12% | 2,07,60,023 | 39.87% |
| 1 to 3 years | 11,79,549 | 18.16% | 1,15,00,652 | 22.09% |
| 3 to 5 years | 6,97,809 | 10.75% | 67,42,993 | 12.95% |
| 5 to 10 years | 13,04,483 | 20.09% | 83,13,346 | 15.97% |
| Over 10 years | 14,85,720 | 22.88% | 47,55,213 | 9.13% |
The brackets do not always add up — and we say so
The Grid’s five age brackets should sum to its pending total. Often they do not. Nationally, the High Court brackets fall 3,432 cases short of the pending total, and the district brackets 3,295 above it. 12 High Courts and 19 States or UTs show a gap of some size. The archive stores each gap in its own column rather than adjusting a bracket to force the sum, and flags any gap above half a per cent.
Share of district cases more than ten years old, by State
States and UTs with at least one lakh pending cases · top ten
Bihar has the largest share of district cases in the oldest bracket, 20.71%, against 9.13% nationally.
Show these figures as a table
| State or UT | Over ten years | Share of pending |
|---|---|---|
| Bihar | 7,84,481 | 20.71% |
| West Bengal | 7,20,308 | 17.07% |
| Uttar Pradesh | 20,78,337 | 14.46% |
| Odisha | 2,72,145 | 14.46% |
| Maharashtra | 4,65,756 | 7.58% |
| Jharkhand | 35,274 | 6.17% |
| Jammu and Kashmir | 16,744 | 4.60% |
| Karnataka | 77,954 | 3.27% |
| Gujarat | 46,472 | 2.98% |
| Tamil Nadu | 50,784 | 2.91% |
Over-ten-year cases ÷ pending cases, per State, from the district file.
Cases with no next hearing date
The Grid publishes two counts that almost nobody tracks over time: pending cases with no next hearing date fixed at all, and cases given a next date more than three months away. Together they come to 91,21,703 district-court cases — 17.52% of all pending cases in those courts.
Share of pending cases with no next date fixed, by State
States and UTs with at least one lakh pending cases · highest twelve
Uttar Pradesh has the highest share of district cases with no next date among the larger States, 24.15%. The largest number in absolute terms is in Uttar Pradesh: 34,69,464 cases.
Show these figures as a table
| State or UT | No next date | Share of pending |
|---|---|---|
| Uttar Pradesh | 34,69,464 | 24.15% |
| Jammu and Kashmir | 35,996 | 9.89% |
| West Bengal | 2,45,168 | 5.81% |
| Bihar | 1,94,391 | 5.13% |
| Assam | 30,164 | 4.98% |
| Delhi | 69,158 | 3.97% |
| Chhattisgarh | 16,045 | 3.37% |
| Himachal Pradesh | 17,359 | 3.13% |
| Andhra Pradesh | 22,032 | 2.34% |
| Uttarakhand | 6,923 | 2.28% |
| Odisha | 42,805 | 2.27% |
| Jharkhand | 11,791 | 2.06% |
Undated cases ÷ pending cases, per State, from district-pendency-latest.csv.
36 of 36 jurisdictions
| Mizoram | 10,033 | 4,783 | 47.67% | 12 | 0.12% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nagaland | 3,801 | 1,234 | 32.47% | 18 | 0.47% |
| Arunachal Pradesh | 16,406 | 4,508 | 27.48% | 902 | 5.50% |
| Uttar Pradesh | 1,43,69,173 | 34,69,464 | 24.15% | 2,28,785 | 1.59% |
| Meghalaya | 19,144 | 4,421 | 23.09% | 132 | 0.69% |
| Ladakh | 1,628 | 168 | 10.32% | 1 | 0.06% |
| Jammu and Kashmir | 3,63,956 | 35,996 | 9.89% | 9,594 | 2.64% |
| Manipur | 14,440 | 900 | 6.23% | 30 | 0.21% |
| Andaman and Nicobar Islands | 9,217 | 536 | 5.82% | 697 | 7.56% |
| West Bengal | 42,20,490 | 2,45,168 | 5.81% | 12,76,045 | 30.23% |
| Bihar | 37,88,420 | 1,94,391 | 5.13% | 1,18,916 | 3.14% |
| Assam | 6,05,825 | 30,164 | 4.98% | 1,10,710 | 18.27% |
| Delhi | 17,39,981 | 69,158 | 3.97% | 5,95,990 | 34.25% |
| Chhattisgarh | 4,75,963 | 16,045 | 3.37% | 11,118 | 2.34% |
| Himachal Pradesh | 5,54,444 | 17,359 | 3.13% | 75,294 | 13.58% |
| Andhra Pradesh | 9,40,001 | 22,032 | 2.34% | 37,885 | 4.03% |
| Uttarakhand | 3,03,913 | 6,923 | 2.28% | 1,087 | 0.36% |
| Odisha | 18,82,600 | 42,805 | 2.27% | 3,58,502 | 19.04% |
| Jharkhand | 5,71,678 | 11,791 | 2.06% | 24,408 | 4.27% |
| Telangana | 10,08,862 | 19,271 | 1.91% | 74,550 | 7.39% |
| Lakshadweep | 585 | 10 | 1.71% | 0 | 0.00% |
| Tripura | 68,082 | 1,048 | 1.54% | 4,907 | 7.21% |
| Puducherry | 37,234 | 528 | 1.42% | 420 | 1.13% |
| Sikkim | 2,310 | 29 | 1.26% | 27 | 1.17% |
| Rajasthan | 26,53,830 | 27,627 | 1.04% | 3,96,407 | 14.94% |
| Kerala | 17,14,132 | 11,107 | 0.65% | 2,20,059 | 12.84% |
| Madhya Pradesh | 21,38,652 | 13,311 | 0.62% | 2,57,550 | 12.04% |
| Haryana | 15,30,451 | 8,306 | 0.54% | 2,36,708 | 15.47% |
| Maharashtra | 61,42,026 | 32,446 | 0.53% | 5,80,968 | 9.46% |
| Chandigarh | 97,778 | 474 | 0.48% | 5,240 | 5.36% |
| Gujarat | 15,57,458 | 7,351 | 0.47% | 5,493 | 0.35% |
| Tamil Nadu | 17,42,689 | 4,761 | 0.27% | 42,675 | 2.45% |
| Punjab | 10,27,146 | 2,346 | 0.23% | 33,653 | 3.28% |
| Karnataka | 23,85,266 | 1,965 | 0.08% | 1,02,137 | 4.28% |
| Goa | 62,721 | 34 | 0.05% | 2,266 | 3.61% |
| Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu | 8,597 | 0 | 0.00% | 57 | 0.66% |
| All India | 5,20,68,932 | 43,08,460 | 8.27% | 48,13,243 | 9.24% |
“No next date” is the Grid’s own classification of what has been entered in each case record. A case can appear here because a date has not been entered as well as because none has been fixed, and the Grid does not separate the two. The count is reported as the Grid publishes it.
Every State and Union Territory — district and subordinate courts
District-court pendency in all 36 States and Union Territories, captured on 14 September 2026. Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and West Bengal together hold 47.50% of the national total. Filter to your State, or sort any column.
Cases pending in district and subordinate courts, by State
The twelve States and UTs with the most pending cases
Uttar Pradesh alone has 1,43,69,173 pending cases, 27.60% of the national figure. Criminal cases make up 78.42% of district pendency nationally.
Show these figures as a table
| State or UT | Pending | Civil | Criminal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uttar Pradesh | 1,43,69,173 | 18,78,074 | 1,24,91,099 |
| Maharashtra | 61,42,026 | 17,78,159 | 43,63,867 |
| West Bengal | 42,20,490 | 6,55,885 | 35,64,605 |
| Bihar | 37,88,420 | 5,51,751 | 32,36,669 |
| Rajasthan | 26,53,830 | 4,86,235 | 21,67,595 |
| Karnataka | 23,85,266 | 10,60,210 | 13,25,056 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 21,38,652 | 4,35,945 | 17,02,707 |
| Odisha | 18,82,600 | 2,68,591 | 16,14,009 |
| Tamil Nadu | 17,42,689 | 6,97,921 | 10,44,768 |
| Delhi | 17,39,981 | 2,21,612 | 15,18,369 |
| Kerala | 17,14,132 | 5,23,685 | 11,90,447 |
| Gujarat | 15,57,458 | 3,15,038 | 12,42,420 |
National Judicial Data Grid, district and taluka courts dashboard, State level.
36 of 36 jurisdictions
| Uttar Pradesh | 1,43,69,173 | 18,78,074 | 1,24,91,099 | 60.19% | 20,78,337 | 34,69,464 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maharashtra | 61,42,026 | 17,78,159 | 43,63,867 | 63.83% | 4,65,756 | 32,446 |
| West Bengal | 42,20,490 | 6,55,885 | 35,64,605 | 65.57% | 7,20,308 | 2,45,168 |
| Bihar | 37,88,420 | 5,51,751 | 32,36,669 | 78.77% | 7,84,481 | 1,94,391 |
| Rajasthan | 26,53,830 | 4,86,235 | 21,67,595 | 61.79% | 46,526 | 27,627 |
| Karnataka | 23,85,266 | 10,60,210 | 13,25,056 | 50.99% | 77,954 | 1,965 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 21,38,652 | 4,35,945 | 17,02,707 | 60.19% | 25,556 | 13,311 |
| Odisha | 18,82,600 | 2,68,591 | 16,14,009 | 74.00% | 2,72,145 | 42,805 |
| Tamil Nadu | 17,42,689 | 6,97,921 | 10,44,768 | 46.20% | 50,784 | 4,761 |
| Delhi | 17,39,981 | 2,21,612 | 15,18,369 | 48.73% | 31,406 | 69,158 |
| Kerala | 17,14,132 | 5,23,685 | 11,90,447 | 57.04% | 33,133 | 11,107 |
| Gujarat | 15,57,458 | 3,15,038 | 12,42,420 | 47.80% | 46,472 | 7,351 |
| Haryana | 15,30,451 | 4,36,357 | 10,94,094 | 55.73% | 4,117 | 8,306 |
| Punjab | 10,27,146 | 3,82,617 | 6,44,529 | 36.94% | 3,018 | 2,346 |
| Telangana | 10,08,862 | 3,42,000 | 6,66,862 | 61.12% | 15,365 | 19,271 |
| Andhra Pradesh | 9,40,001 | 4,35,578 | 5,04,423 | 58.97% | 13,797 | 22,032 |
| Assam | 6,05,825 | 1,15,531 | 4,90,294 | 53.17% | 8,028 | 30,164 |
| Jharkhand | 5,71,678 | 99,681 | 4,71,997 | 61.55% | 35,274 | 11,791 |
| Himachal Pradesh | 5,54,444 | 1,78,121 | 3,76,323 | 40.68% | 7,116 | 17,359 |
| Chhattisgarh | 4,75,963 | 87,645 | 3,88,318 | 49.44% | 927 | 16,045 |
| Jammu and Kashmir | 3,63,956 | 1,24,050 | 2,39,906 | 58.46% | 16,744 | 35,996 |
| Uttarakhand | 3,03,913 | 50,671 | 2,53,242 | 55.09% | 5,461 | 6,923 |
| Chandigarh | 97,778 | 24,121 | 73,657 | 41.06% | 349 | 474 |
| Tripura | 68,082 | 13,877 | 54,205 | 24.05% | 526 | 1,048 |
| Goa | 62,721 | 28,404 | 34,317 | 57.57% | 3,809 | 34 |
| Puducherry | 37,234 | 11,566 | 25,668 | 52.24% | 1,819 | 528 |
| Meghalaya | 19,144 | 5,366 | 13,778 | 56.50% | 2,093 | 4,421 |
| Arunachal Pradesh | 16,406 | 3,878 | 12,528 | 54.00% | 1,246 | 4,508 |
| Manipur | 14,440 | 9,283 | 5,157 | 47.72% | 647 | 900 |
| Mizoram | 10,033 | 4,544 | 5,489 | 28.86% | 23 | 4,783 |
| Andaman and Nicobar Islands | 9,217 | 4,271 | 4,946 | 73.49% | 1,405 | 536 |
| Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu | 8,597 | 3,857 | 4,740 | 59.37% | 323 | 0 |
| Nagaland | 3,801 | 1,045 | 2,756 | 62.72% | 233 | 1,234 |
| Sikkim | 2,310 | 968 | 1,342 | 26.28% | 4 | 29 |
| Ladakh | 1,628 | 783 | 845 | 39.25% | 9 | 168 |
| Lakshadweep | 585 | 143 | 442 | 60.00% | 22 | 10 |
| All India | 5,20,68,932 | 1,12,37,463 | 4,08,31,469 | 60.13% | 47,55,213 | 43,08,460 |
The downloadable file has every column the Grid publishes for each State — all five age brackets split into civil and criminal, pre-litigation matters, cases listed on the capture day, and the women and senior-citizen tags. District judiciary judge strength is not included: sanctioned and working strength for district courts is not published as a public dataset.
Who is waiting — cases filed by women and by senior citizens
The Grid tags some pending cases as filed by women and some as filed by senior citizens. In district courts 39,47,647 pending cases carry the women tag and 33,13,258 the senior-citizen tag; in the High Courts, 4,34,175 and 8,41,458.
Two cautions before using these counts
The Grid does not say the two tags exclude each other, so a case filed by a woman who is a senior citizen may be counted in both. Do not add them together. The tags also depend on what was recorded when the case was filed; a case without the tag is not evidence that the person filing was not a woman or a senior citizen.
High Court of Delhi does not appear in the Grid’s High Court tables for these tags at all, so its row is left blank rather than counted as zero.
| Tier | Filed by women | Filed by senior citizens |
|---|---|---|
| District and subordinate courts | 39,47,647 | 33,13,258 |
| High Courts | 4,34,175 | 8,41,458 |
25 of 25 High Courts
| Allahabad High Court | 12,52,213 | 49,362 | 3.94% | 1,04,612 | 8.35% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High Court of Rajasthan | 7,07,695 | 80,430 | 11.37% | 1,34,672 | 19.03% |
| Bombay High Court | 6,48,519 | 55,526 | 8.56% | 99,875 | 15.40% |
| Madras High Court | 5,61,098 | 12,383 | 2.21% | 39,242 | 6.99% |
| High Court of Madhya Pradesh | 4,94,451 | 68,108 | 13.77% | 72,331 | 14.63% |
| High Court of Punjab and Haryana | 4,21,378 | 12,503 | 2.97% | 18,295 | 4.34% |
| High Court of Karnataka | 3,35,610 | 3,611 | 1.08% | 60,028 | 17.89% |
| High Court of Andhra Pradesh | 2,54,248 | 7,470 | 2.94% | 45,147 | 17.76% |
| High Court for the State of Telangana | 2,44,449 | 20,679 | 8.46% | 41,440 | 16.95% |
| High Court of Kerala | 2,44,149 | 21,576 | 8.84% | 45,941 | 18.82% |
| Patna High Court | 2,21,369 | 23,351 | 10.55% | 41,497 | 18.75% |
| Calcutta High Court | 1,97,075 | 12,114 | 6.15% | 20,630 | 10.47% |
| High Court of Gujarat | 1,76,765 | 2,159 | 1.22% | 23,777 | 13.45% |
| Orissa High Court | 1,73,432 | 18,480 | 10.66% | 29,188 | 16.83% |
| High Court of Delhi | 1,27,231 | not in the Grid’s table | — | not in the Grid’s table | — |
| High Court of Himachal Pradesh | 1,05,276 | 11,239 | 10.68% | 16,539 | 15.71% |
| High Court of Jharkhand | 74,226 | 6,549 | 8.82% | 11,454 | 15.43% |
| High Court of Chhattisgarh | 72,829 | 9,312 | 12.79% | 9,638 | 13.23% |
| Gauhati High Court | 65,533 | 7,113 | 10.85% | 8,441 | 12.88% |
| High Court of Uttarakhand | 64,102 | 7,785 | 12.14% | 8,113 | 12.66% |
| High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh | 44,963 | 3,084 | 6.86% | 8,669 | 19.28% |
| High Court of Manipur | 6,385 | 838 | 13.12% | 1,362 | 21.33% |
| High Court of Meghalaya | 1,973 | 318 | 16.12% | 224 | 11.35% |
| High Court of Tripura | 1,681 | 143 | 8.51% | 296 | 17.61% |
| High Court of Sikkim | 339 | 42 | 12.39% | 47 | 13.86% |
Why this archive starts in September 2026
The National Judicial Data Grid is a live dashboard. It shows today's figure and overwrites yesterday's, keeps no history, and offers no download. Once a month has passed, nobody — not a researcher, not a newsroom, not GetNyay — can recover what the Grid showed in it. This archive takes one dated reading a month and keeps it, starting with the September 2026 capture.
What the archive holds
Each dot is a dated reading kept in the archive
Judge strength goes back further than pendency, to the statement as on 1 September 2025, because the Department of Justice keeps its older statements online. The Grid half starts at the first capture and grows by one reading a month from here.
Show these figures as a table
| Date | Reading kept |
|---|---|
| 12 September 2025 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 September 2025 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 5 December 2025 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 December 2025 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 9 January 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 24 December 2025 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay; it does not reconcile with its own arithmetic and is flagged) |
| 16 February 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 February 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 3 March 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 March 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 15 March 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 13 March 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 2 April 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 April 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 4 May 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 May 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 2 June 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 June 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 1 July 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 July 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay; it does not reconcile with its own arithmetic and is flagged) |
| 3 August 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 August 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay; it does not reconcile with its own arithmetic and is flagged) |
| 3 September 2026 | Department of Justice statement as on 1 September 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay) |
| 14 September 2026 | National Judicial Data Grid, district and subordinate courts — September 2026 capture, 36 States and UTs |
| 14 September 2026 | National Judicial Data Grid, High Courts — September 2026 capture, 25 High Courts |
Generated from MANIFEST.json, the archive's own index.
Capture log
- 12 September 2025Department of Justice statement as on 1 September 2025 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 5 December 2025Department of Justice statement as on 1 December 2025 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 9 January 2026Department of Justice statement as on 24 December 2025 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay; it does not reconcile with its own arithmetic and is flagged)
- 16 February 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 February 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 3 March 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 March 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 15 March 2026Department of Justice statement as on 13 March 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 2 April 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 April 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 4 May 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 May 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 2 June 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 June 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 1 July 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 July 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay; it does not reconcile with its own arithmetic and is flagged)
- 3 August 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 August 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay; it does not reconcile with its own arithmetic and is flagged)
- 3 September 2026Department of Justice statement as on 1 September 2026 (posted by the Department on this date; archived by GetNyay)
- 14 September 2026National Judicial Data Grid, district and subordinate courts — September 2026 capture, 36 States and UTs
- 14 September 2026National Judicial Data Grid, High Courts — September 2026 capture, 25 High Courts
What is not in the archive, and why
- NJDG history before 2026-09 (NJDG keeps none).
- District judiciary sanctioned/working strength (not published as a public dataset).
- District-level (below State) NJDG figures.
- DoJ statements for October 2025, November 2025 and January 2026 (not on the DoJ site).
How this archive compares with other public sources
Several organisations publish Indian court data, and each is the right source for something. This table sets out what each offers, as checked on the source's own pages, so you can choose the one that fits your question.
| Source | What it publishes | How often | History | Download | Licence | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National Judicial Data Grid | Live pendency, age of cases, undated cases, for every court | Live | None kept — each figure replaces the last | No | Not stated | Today’s figure for one court or State |
| Department of Justice vacancy statements | Sanctioned, working and vacant judge posts, Supreme Court and High Courts | About monthly, with some mid-month statements | Past statements stay listed | PDF only | Not stated | The official judge strength on a given date |
| India Justice Report | State rankings across police, prisons, judiciary and legal aid | Periodic editions | Multi-year trends per indicator | Yes | CC BY 4.0 | Comparing States on justice capacity over several years |
| DAKSH | Research and case-level databases on courts | Irregular | Varies by dataset | Yes, for some datasets | CC BY-NC 4.0 (non-commercial) | Case-level research questions |
| PRS Legislative Research — Vital Stats | Briefs on pendency and vacancies | Occasional | Long-run series in each brief | Not stated | Longer-run context | |
| Answers in Parliament | Figures given in reply to a specific question | When asked | One reading per answer | Government material | An official figure on the day it was asked for | |
| This archive (GetNyay) | Grid pendency by court and State, judge strength, cases per working judge, undated cases by State | Monthly capture; judge statements checked weekly | Grid from September 2026; judge strength from 1 September 2025 | CSV, eight files | CC BY 4.0 | A dated, citable reading, and change month to month |
What this archive adds
- A month-by-month record of what the National Judicial Data Grid showed. The Grid itself keeps none.
- The Department of Justice statements as one spreadsheet-ready time series, court by court, instead of a separate PDF each month.
- Pending cases per working judge for every High Court, recalculated each month with the date of both inputs shown.
- Cases with no next hearing date, and cases dated more than three months ahead, by State, as a series.
- One open licence across the whole compilation, a ready-made citation, and a documented method with a corrections log.
The full dataset
Eight files, free to download, no signup. Every CSV opens with a block of lines beginning with # that defines every column, the source, the licence and the citation — so a file forwarded on its own still says what it is.
| File | Kind | What it holds |
|---|---|---|
| hc-pendency-latest.csv | Latest | Every High Court and the national row, one line each: pending cases, their age, over-one-year counts, the women and senior-citizen tags, and the Grid’s own institution and disposal counts. |
| district-pendency-latest.csv | Latest | Every State and Union Territory and the national row for district and subordinate courts, including cases with no next date and cases dated more than three months ahead. |
| judge-strength-latest.csv | Latest | The latest Department of Justice statement: sanctioned, working and vacant posts, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court. |
| cases-per-judge-timeseries.csv | Time series | Pending cases per working judge for each High Court and every capture, with the dates of both inputs and the gap between them. |
| hc-pendency-timeseries.csv | Time series | Every High Court figure from every monthly capture, in long format. |
| district-pendency-timeseries.csv | Time series | Every district-court figure by State from every monthly capture, in long format. |
| judge-strength-timeseries.csv | Time series | Every Department of Justice statement in the archive, court by court, in long format. |
| MANIFEST.json | Index | The index of the archive: every month, every capture attempt, every statement, and anything incomplete. |
“Latest” files
One row per court or State, one column per figure, for the most recent capture only. Open one in Excel and it reads like the tables on this page. Each is replaced every month.
“Time series” files
Every capture the archive has ever made, kept forever. They grow by one reading a month and are what you need to show change over time.
What “long format” means in Excel
The history files have one row per court, per measure, per date, with the figure in a single value column. To see courts down the side and dates across the top, insert a PivotTable: court in Rows, the date column in Columns, value in Values, and filter to the one measure you want.
In Excel, lines beginning with # appear as rows at the top of the sheet; delete them or start your selection at the header row. The raw Grid pages and Department PDFs behind every capture are kept in the archive and can be supplied on request.
What we deliberately did not calculate
- Why is there no figure for individual judges?
- The Grid does not publish pendency by judge, and a court-level ratio divided among named judges would describe nobody. Every figure here is for a whole court or a whole State.
- Why are judges and benches not ranked?
- Cases per working judge measures a caseload against a strength count. It says nothing about the pace, quality or difficulty of any judge’s work, so ranking people or benches on it would be a false reading of the data.
- Why is there no disposal-rate league table?
- The Grid labels its monthly institution and disposal counts only as “last month”, with no date and no definition, and the district figures do not reconcile with the movement in total pendency. Until the period and basis can be confirmed, a table built on them would rank courts on an unknown quantity.
- Why are the missing months not filled in?
- A month with no Department of Justice statement, and every month before the archive began, is shown as a gap. Drawing a line through it, or estimating it, would invent a figure no source ever published.
- Why is there no district-by-district breakdown?
- The archive captures district and subordinate courts at State and Union Territory level. District-level dashboards are not captured, so no figure below State level appears here.
- Why is there no forecast of when the backlog will clear?
- A “years to clear” figure needs a disposal rate on a known basis and an assumption that nothing changes. Neither holds, so the page reports what the sources show and projects nothing.
If you are here because your own case is stuck
These figures describe whole courts, not your file. The status of an individual case — its next date, the last order, the court hall — is on the eCourts case-status service, searchable by case number, party name or advocate. If your case shows no next date, that is the same “undated” category counted above, and the court registry is where a listing is sought.
Method
Where the figures come from
Pending cases, their age, undated cases and the women and senior-citizen tags come from the two National Judicial Data Grid dashboards — one for the High Courts, one for district and subordinate courts — read once a month. Judge strength comes from the Department of Justice's statements of sanctioned, working and vacant posts, downloaded as the Department publishes them. The September 2026 capture was taken on 14 September 2026; 12 Department statements are in the archive.
What we calculate and what we quote
Every count is quoted exactly as the source prints it. Three things are calculated: cases per working judge (a court’s pending total divided by its working judges), the vacancy rate (vacant posts divided by sanctioned posts), and shares such as the percentage of cases more than a year old. Each is marked as a GetNyay calculation where it appears, and the inputs are in the files so anyone can reproduce it. Lakh and crore wording is cut, never rounded up, and always sits beside the exact figure.
The date mismatch between the two sources
The two halves of the ratio carry different dates. Pending cases are read from the Grid on the capture day, which the Grid itself does not date. Judge strength comes from the Department statement dated on or before that day. For the September 2026 capture the statement is dated 1 September 2026 and the capture 14 September 2026, 13 days apart. The gap is printed in the file for every row.
Rows flagged as anomalies
Nothing is dropped or corrected. Where a source fails its own arithmetic — age brackets that do not add up to the total, a vacancy that is not sanctioned minus working, a court missing from one of the Grid's tables — the row is kept exactly as published and flagged, with the reason written into the file. 3 of the 12 Department statements in the archive do not reconcile with their own arithmetic and are flagged.
How often this changes
A new Grid capture every month, from the 3rd; the next is scheduled for 3 October 2026. Department statements are checked for weekly. Each update passes an automatic set of checks before it is published, and the page, its charts and its tables are rebuilt from the files each time — nothing on the page is typed in by hand.
Corrections
If a figure here is wrong, write to team@getnyay.in. A correction is made in the files, logged below with its date and what changed, and never made silently. Where the Department replaces a statement with a corrected upload, the archive keeps both and uses the newer one that reconciles.
Corrections log
No corrections have been made to the archive since its first capture on 14 September 2026. When one is, it will appear here with its date and what changed.
Institutions and disposals
The Grid also prints cases “instituted in last month” and “disposal in last month”. It does not say which dates that month covers or whether the two are counted on the same basis, and the district figures cannot be reconciled with the month-to-month movement in total pendency. They are kept in the files exactly as labelled, but this page does not compare them or draw any conclusion from them until their basis can be confirmed.
How each month’s update reaches this page
Step 1
Capture
From the 3rd of each month the Grid is read once, State by State and court by court, and retried daily to the 10th if it fails. Department of Justice statements are checked for every Monday.
Step 2
Store before parsing
The raw pages and PDFs are saved first and never overwritten, so a parsing fault can be fixed later without losing the month.
Step 3
Referee
Row counts, missing courts, the statement’s own arithmetic, movement against the previous capture, new anomaly flags, and a clean parse through the same code this page uses.
Every check passes
The update is published automatically. The site rebuilds, and every figure, sentence, chart and table on this page moves to the new capture.
Any check fails
Nothing is published. The previous figures stay on this page until a person has read the failed check and decided what it means.
Who compiled this
Compiled and checked by Deepak Middha, a Chartered Accountant with 18 years in the hedge fund and alternative-investment industry, who reads the primary document behind every regulatory figure published on GetNyay. He is not a lawyer and this page is not legal advice. Our editorial policy sets out how figures are sourced and corrected.
Questions about these figures
The things reporters and readers ask most often, answered from the same files.
How many cases are pending in Indian courts right now?
When the National Judicial Data Grid was read on 14 September 2026, it showed 5,20,68,932 cases pending in district and subordinate courts and 64,96,989 in the 25 High Courts. Supreme Court pendency is not part of this archive. Of the district-court cases, 4,08,31,469 were criminal and 1,12,37,463 civil. This is the archive's first capture (September 2026), so there is no earlier month to compare it with yet.
Which High Court has the most pending cases per judge?
High Court of Rajasthan had 18,146.03 pending cases for each working judge — 7,07,695 cases and 39 judges — against 7,942.53 across all High Courts. The ratio compares a court's caseload with its judge strength on one date. It is not a measure of how fast any judge works, and the smallest courts' ratios are not comparable with the largest.
How many High Court judge posts are vacant in India?
The Department of Justice statement as on 1 September 2026 shows 304 vacancies against 1,122 sanctioned High Court posts, with 818 judges working — a vacancy rate of 27.09%. The Supreme Court had 34 judges against 38 sanctioned posts, including the Chief Justice of India.
How many court cases have been pending for more than ten years?
47,55,213 cases in district and subordinate courts and 14,85,720 in the High Courts were more than ten years old on 14 September 2026, by the National Judicial Data Grid's own age brackets. That is 9.13% of district-court pendency and 22.87% of High Court pendency.
What does "no next date fixed" mean on the National Judicial Data Grid?
The Grid counts a pending case as undated when no next hearing date has been entered for it. On 14 September 2026 there were 43,08,460 such cases in district and subordinate courts — 8.27% of all pending cases — and a further 48,13,243 had been given a next date more than three months away.
Why does this court data start in September 2026?
The National Judicial Data Grid shows a live figure and keeps no record of what it showed before, so no earlier month can be recovered by anyone. GetNyay began archiving it with the September 2026 capture. Judge strength goes back further, to the statement as on 1 September 2025, because the Department of Justice still hosts its older statements.
How often is this court pendency data updated?
The Grid is captured once a month, from the 3rd, and retried daily to the 10th if a capture fails. The next capture is scheduled for 3 October 2026. Department of Justice statements are checked for every Monday, because they are published irregularly. Each update is checked automatically before it goes live, and the date at the top of this page moves with it.
Can I use these court figures in a news story?
Yes. The compilation and the derived series are published under CC BY 4.0: reuse any figure, table or chart with credit to GetNyay and a link to this page. The underlying figures are Government of India material. The citation below is ready to paste, and team@getnyay.in replies to press queries the same day.
Sources
Every official source behind a figure on this page, linked to the original. Nothing here is sourced from a news report.
- 1
National Judicial Data Grid (eCourts), High Court NJDG dashboard.
Pending cases, age of pending cases and cases tagged as filed by women and senior citizens, for each of the 25 High Courts and nationally. Read once a month; NJDG prints no as-of date, so the capture date is the only date these figures carry.
- 2
National Judicial Data Grid (eCourts), District and taluka courts NJDG dashboard.
Pending cases in district and subordinate courts for each State and Union Territory and nationally, their age, cases with no next date fixed, and cases given a next date more than three months away.
- 3
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Vacancy positions — listing of monthly statements.
The page on which the Department of Justice posts its statements of sanctioned strength, working strength and vacancies for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 4
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 September 2025.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 5
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 December 2025.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 6
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 24 December 2025.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 7
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 February 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 8
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 March 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 9
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 13 March 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 10
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 April 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 11
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 May 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 12
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 June 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 13
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 July 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 14
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 August 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
- 15
Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Statement of vacancies as on 1 September 2026.
Sanctioned, working and vacant posts of judges, permanent and additional, for the Supreme Court and each High Court.
Use this data
Cite this page
The compilation, the monthly archive and the derived series are published by GetNyay under CC BY 4.0. The underlying figures are Government of India material from the National Judicial Data Grid and the Department of Justice.
GetNyay, "India Court Pendency and Judge Strength Archive", getnyay.in/data/court-archive/, capture 2026-09. Compiled from monthly captures of the National Judicial Data Grid and Department of Justice vacancy statements.A sentence you can quote
According to National Judicial Data Grid figures archived by GetNyay on 14 September 2026, India's High Courts had 64,96,989 pending cases and 818 working judges — 7,942.53 cases per judge — with 304 of 1,122 sanctioned posts vacant as on 1 September 2026.
Charts may be reproduced with the same credit; each has its own link from the chart title. For a specific cut of the data, a court-level breakdown, or a comment for a story, write to team@getnyay.in — we reply to press queries the same day.
Related
- GetNyay Data — all datasets
- India Consumer Justice Tracker
- India Cyber Fraud Tracker
- The Code of Civil Procedure
- The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Partition suit
- Legal deadline calculators
GetNyay is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. This page reports published government figures.