The backlog of cases in Bangladesh’s judiciary continues to rise due to various factors. When the judiciary was separated from the executive on 1 November 2007, it had around 1.57 million pending cases. The number has now exceeded 4.7 million, including more than 700,000 cases in the Supreme Court alone.
The total continues to grow as the number of newly filed cases outpaces the number of cases disposed of. For instance, in the four months since September, the caseload has increased by about 43,000. Observers say the judiciary appears to be buckling under the mounting burden, and at the current pace the number of pending cases may soon reach five million.
According to the latest data available up to December, there were 4,742,731 cases pending across the judiciary. Of these, 659,256 were in the High Court Division and 41,551 in the Appellate Division, while the remainder were pending in lower courts.
Earlier data show that by September the country’s courts had 4,699,796 pending cases. At that time, the High Court had 637,882 cases and the Appellate Division 39,417, with the rest pending in subordinate courts.
Further analysis shows that as of 30 September 2024, courts across the country had a total of 4,443,510 pending cases. Of these, 28,901 were in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court and 577,280 in the High Court Division.
By 30 June last year, the total number of pending cases in the judiciary had risen to 4,652,260. Among them, 37,002 were in the Appellate Division, 616,453 in the High Court Division and 3,998,805 in subordinate courts. This means that within nine months the caseload increased by 208,750 cases.
According to the most recent information, the judiciary has 2,341 judges in total, including 103 in the High Court Division and five in the Appellate Division. Analysis shows that the average caseload per judge exceeds 2,025 cases. In the Supreme Court, the average caseload per judge is more than 6,488 — about 6,400 in the High Court Division and 8,290 in the Appellate Division. In subordinate courts, each judge handles more than 1,810 cases on average.
Officials concerned say the number of judges is far lower than required relative to the number of pending cases. As a result, case disposal remains limited and the backlog continues to grow. They say the number of judges must be increased, which will also require more court buildings and additional benches.
They warn that there is no longer room to remain inactive regarding the backlog. According to the recommendations of the Judicial Reform Commission, the number of judges in subordinate courts must be increased to at least 6,000 to bring the backlog to a manageable level.
However, appointing such a large number of judges at once would take time, and it would be difficult to find experienced judges immediately. Therefore, the commission recommended gradually increasing the number of judges.
Former Public Prosecutor of Dhaka’s Speedy Trial Tribunal Advocate Faruk Ahmad told TIMES that many judges in lower courts do not sit in court on time, begin proceedings late and sometimes leave the bench before the scheduled end of court hours.
“In such cases, action should be taken against those responsible,” he said.
He added that prosecution teams often fail to bring witnesses on time, which forces courts to adjourn hearings. Unnecessary delays occur in many cases. There is also a shortage of courtrooms. Some lawyers repeatedly seek adjournments, leaving cases hanging for long periods, and such practices should face disciplinary action.
However, he said reducing the backlog would require a change in mindset among all parties involved. Without such a shift, no initiative would prove effective.
The Judicial Reform Commission has made several recommendations to address the backlog, including appointing retired district judges on contractual terms.
Other recommendations include ensuring institutional independence of the Supreme Court; reforming recruitment, promotion, transfer and disciplinary procedures for judges in subordinate courts; establishing a permanent attorney service and an independent criminal investigation service; reducing executive control over the judiciary as much as possible; introducing an effective permanent alternative dispute resolution system; decentralising the judiciary appropriately; and taking effective measures to prevent false and vexatious cases.
Supreme Court lawyer Saiful Islam Saif told Times that one major cause of case backlog in higher courts is the frequent dissolution of benches in the middle of hearings, forcing cases to be reheard before a different bench.
He added that the number of judges in higher courts — particularly in the Appellate Division — remains very limited. Increasing the number of judges and forming more benches is essential.
He also said that the tendency to file appeals without merit must be curbed.
