True Justice Lies in District Courts, Says CJI Kant - 2026-01-21

True Justice Lies in District Courts, Says CJI Kant

In a stirring address that resonated deeply with the legal fraternity, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant on Monday urged young lawyers to anchor their careers in the district courts, dismissing the prevalent misconception that premier law degrees entitle them to bypass the grassroots level of the judiciary. Speaking at a felicitation event organized by the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) on the lawns of the Delhi High Court, the 53rd CJI emphasized that "true justice" is dispensed not in the lofty appellate forums but at the district level, where ordinary citizens first seek enforcement of their rights. Kant's remarks, drawing from his own journey as a first-generation lawyer, called for systemic incentives to cultivate a robust professional culture in trial courts, potentially reshaping how India's burgeoning pool of legal talent navigates their early careers. Attended by judges from the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court, as well as prominent bar leaders, the event underscored the CJI's vision for a more equitable and grounded judicial system.

The Felicitation Event: Honoring a New Era in Judiciary Leadership

The event marked a ceremonial welcome for CJI Surya Kant, who assumed office in November 2025 as the nation's top judicial figure. Organized by the BCD to honor his elevation, the gathering brought together an august assembly of legal luminaries. Judges from the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court were present, alongside office-bearers from various bar associations of Delhi's district courts. Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra, Chairman of the Bar Council of India, and ASG Chetan Sharma, Chairman of the BCD's Special Committee, joined the proceedings, as did eminent advocates like Maninder Singh, Vikas Singh, and N. Hariharan.

Delhi High Court Chief Justice Upadhyaya, in his remarks, lauded Kant's trajectory, describing it in one word: "persistence." As a first-generation lawyer without generational backing, Kant's rise exemplified how conviction could outpace privilege. "Persistence always beats privileges," Upadhyaya noted, highlighting the CJI's formative years in district courts under the mentorship of a leading civil lawyer. This personal touch set the tone for Kant's speech, which blended autobiography with policy advocacy, reinforcing the event's theme of strengthening the roots of the legal profession.

The timing of Kant's address is particularly poignant amid ongoing challenges in the Indian judiciary. With over 4.4 crore cases pending across courts as per the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), a significant backlog—around 80%—resides in district and subordinate courts. The migration of talent to metropolitan high courts and the Supreme Court exacerbates this, leaving trial courts under-resourced and perpetuating delays in access to justice for the common litigant.

Addressing Misconceptions in Legal Careers

At the heart of CJI Kant's message was a pointed critique of the elitist mindset pervading legal education, particularly among graduates of National Law Universities (NLUs) and other premier institutions. Kant observed a widespread belief that a degree from such "national universities" guarantees a shortcut to high-profile practice in appellate courts. "There is a misconception created that because 'I am a law graduate from a national university', the minimum place or standard for my practice should be either the High Court or the Supreme Court. We have to first address this misconception," he stated unequivocally.

This misconception, Kant argued, undermines the foundational skills essential for effective legal practice. NLUs, established under the model of accessible elite education, produce thousands of graduates annually—over 5,000 from the 25 NLUs alone—but many gravitate toward corporate law firms, litigation in Delhi or Mumbai, or even non-practice roles, sidelining district courts. The result is a skewed distribution of legal expertise, where district courts, handling the bulk of civil, criminal, and family matters, suffer from a dearth of motivated young talent. Kant's intervention seeks to recalibrate these aspirations, positioning district practice not as a stepping stone but as the bedrock of professional growth.

The Foundational Role of District Courts

CJI Kant passionately defended the district judiciary as the true vanguard of justice delivery. He lambasted the colloquial use of "lower courts" to describe these institutions, terming it a "misbranding" that diminishes their stature. "Being an important organ of an independent judiciary, these courts play a more important role than the appellate fora," he asserted. District courts, Kant explained, are where law transitions from abstract principles to practical, humane application—where clients first encounter the system and where disputes find their initial resolution.

Drawing a vivid analogy, the CJI likened district courts to "primary health centres" in the healthcare ecosystem. "If a litigant, a consumer of justice, is satisfactorily dealt with in this primary health centre [the district court], I am quite sure he will not be required to be shifted to bigger hospitals. Definitely, he will not be required to go to a trauma centre," he remarked. This metaphor underscores the preventive and accessible nature of trial court adjudication, preventing escalation to higher forums and ensuring timely relief under principles enshrined in Article 39A of the Constitution, which mandates free legal aid and equal justice.

Kant further elaborated that district courts serve as "breeding centres" for cultivating professional culture, imparting skills in drafting, cross-examination, and witness handling that form the backbone of appellate advocacy. Without this grounding, lawyers risk entering higher courts ill-equipped, perpetuating inefficiencies.

CJI Kant's Personal Insights and Reflections

Lending authenticity to his advocacy, CJI Kant shared anecdotes from his early career, which began in the district courts. Joining the office of a senior civil lawyer, he learned the intricacies of petition drafting, plaints, affidavits, and trial techniques. "The success he gained in his life is because of his experience in the district role," sources recounted, noting how, after just one year of juniorship, seniors sought his drafting expertise due to the precision honed at the grassroots.

Kant's narrative resonates in a profession where mentorship is increasingly scarce. As a first-generation lawyer, he had no familial networks, relying instead on district-level immersion to build conviction and skills. This story not only humanizes the CJI but also serves as a blueprint for young advocates, illustrating how persistence in trial courts can propel one to the apex.

Calls for Incentives and Cultural Shift

Beyond critique, Kant proposed actionable reforms, urging the Supreme Court and high courts to "incentivise" district practice. "I will request even to the high court and to my own colleagues in the Supreme Court that let us try to incentivise the practices in the district courts and try to cultivate that culture which will strengthen our legal bar," he said. This collaborative approach between the Bar and the Bench could involve targeted programs: stipends for junior lawyers in districts, mandatory stints for NLU graduates, or recognition for district-level achievements in bar elections.

Such measures align with recommendations from bodies like the Law Commission of India, which in its 261st Report (2015) highlighted the need for better infrastructure and talent retention in subordinate judiciary. By fostering mentorship and robust practice in trial courts, these incentives could address vacancies—currently around 30% in district judgeships—and reduce the urban-rural divide in legal services.

Technology's Role in Modern Legal Practice

In a forward-looking note, CJI Kant acknowledged technology's utility while cautioning against over-reliance. "Technology is of good help in drafting, but application of mind has to be learnt," he observed. Tools like AI-driven research and e-filing have streamlined procedures, but the irreplaceable elements—critical thinking, ethical judgment, and empathy—must be nurtured in the hands-on environment of district courts. This balanced view positions tech as an enabler, not a substitute, for the human-centric approach Kant champions.

Broader Judicial Developments

While the spotlight was on CJI Kant, the event unfolded against a backdrop of ongoing judicial activity. In a separate Delhi High Court proceeding, the bench pulled up an advocate for seeking an adjournment in a decade-old 2014 service matter against Oriental Insurance Company, remarking on the lack of urgency: "This is a petition of 2014 pertaining to service matter. There appears to be no rush or hurry in the mind of the litigant or the counsel." The case was deferred to August 10, highlighting persistent issues of delay that Kant's reforms aim to mitigate.

Elsewhere, the Delhi High Court issued notices in the Mewar royal family property dispute, where Lakshyaraj Singh seeks control of assets, prompting responses from sisters like Padmaja Kumari. Justice Prasad indicated he might hear interconnected pleas together, with counsel Arvind Nigam arguing for joint proceedings to establish the will's validity under succession laws. "Onus is on them to establish the validity of the will in the proceedings that they have initiated now," Nigam stressed, citing precedents on probate and inheritance.

In consumer jurisprudence, a Delhi district consumer commission directed Air India to pay ₹1.5 lakh to a father-daughter duo for deficient services—including broken seats, unhygienic toilets, and poor food—on a flight. Awarding ₹50,000 each for mental agony and ₹50,000 in costs under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the panel denied ticket refunds since the journey was completed, reinforcing accountability in service sectors.

Implications for the Indian Legal Landscape

CJI Kant's remarks carry profound implications for the legal community. By challenging NLU-driven elitism, they could democratize practice, drawing more talent to underserved districts and aligning with the judiciary's constitutional mandate for accessible justice. Reduced pendency and enhanced trial advocacy would bolster public trust, currently strained by perceptions of urban bias.

For young lawyers, this is a clarion call to invest in foundational skills, potentially increasing opportunities for mentorship and work-life balance away from the high-stakes appellate grind. Bar councils and law schools might integrate district exposure into curricula, while higher courts could pilot incentive schemes.

Yet, implementation hinges on collaboration. Without addressing infrastructural woes—like inadequate facilities in many districts—these ideals risk remaining aspirational. Kant's vision, if realized, could fortify the judiciary's roots, ensuring the "human approach" he extols permeates every level.

Conclusion

CJI Surya Kant's address transcends a mere speech; it is a manifesto for revitalizing India's justice delivery. By advocating for district courts as the cradle of true justice and calling for incentives to engage young lawyers there, he addresses a critical fault line in the profession. As the legal community reflects on his words—"True justice resides only at the grassroots-level courts"—the path forward lies in collective action. Only then can the bar cultivate a culture that honors its foundational pillars, delivering equitable justice to all.