The staggering backlog of cases pending with courts across Bangladesh is more than a statistical concern -- it is a reflection of a justice system struggling to keep pace with public demand. According to information placed before Parliament by the Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Minister, a total of 4,639,476 civil and criminal cases remained pending across the country's courts as of March this year. Of these, 561,044 cases were awaiting disposal in the Supreme Court alone. The Appellate Division had 38,713 pending cases, while the High Court Division was burdened with 522,331 cases. The remaining 4,078,432 cases were pending with subordinate courts, where criminal cases outnumbered civil disputes by a considerable margin.
The judiciary, however, has not remained entirely inactive. During 2025, the Appellate Division disposed of 7,553 cases and the High Court Division resolved another 55,756, bringing the total number of cases settled by the apex court to 63,309. Subordinate courts disposed of 275,084 cases during the same period. These figures underscore a harsh reality-- the inflow of new cases outstripping the pace of disposal, leaving the backlog to swell. The government's response has mainly been to expand the judicial capacity. More than 500 judicial posts have been created, recruitment of 150 civil judges is underway and the Judicial Service Commission continues to appoint supporting staff. In addition, hundreds of new courts -- including Civil Judge, Senior Civil Judge, Joint District and Sessions Judge and Additional District and Sessions Judge courts -- have been established to strengthen the judicial infrastructure. These initiatives deserve recognition. However, they also invite a more fundamental question: is the shortage of judges the principal cause of the growing backlog? The answer is unlikely to be an unqualified yes.
The persistence of judicial congestion suggests that the problem runs much deeper than manpower shortage alone. Lengthy procedural requirements, frequent adjournments, inadequate case management, delays in investigations, poor coordination among institutions and an entrenched culture of litigation collectively contribute to an often painfully slow judicial process. Appointing more judges, while necessary, may offer only limited relief unless accompanied with meaningful reforms in the way cases are managed and adjudicated. What is needed is a holistic strategy that embraces technology-driven case management, wider adoption of digital filing and virtual hearings where appropriate, stricter control over unnecessary adjournments, greater use of alternative dispute resolution for suitable civil matters and improved accountability throughout the justice delivery chain. Equally important is to ensure that investigative agencies and prosecution services function efficiently so that cases reach the courts in a state fit for timely adjudication.
The effectiveness of judiciary is measured not only by the fairness of its judgments but also by the timeliness with which justice is delivered. Reducing the enormous backlog, therefore, is not simply an administrative objective -- it is essential to safeguarding the rule of law. Unless systemic reforms accompany the expansion of judicial capacity, timely delivery of justice may continue to remain elusive for millions of citizens seeking redress through the courts.
