Case Backlog Surges 110% in 15 Years as Judges Rise Just 13%
Graphics: Agamir Somoy
Court cases have continued to move through multiple stages of the judicial process for years, leaving litigants stuck in long waits. Even within the corridors of the Supreme Court, the sound of people waiting for justice echoes as a quiet but persistent frustration.
As population growth accelerates, the number of pending cases has increased exponentially, while the number of judges has remained nearly stagnant. For many citizens, access to timely justice has become an increasingly distant prospect.
The overall picture of case backlog is alarming. Compared to 2010, pending cases in the High Court Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh rose by around 110% in 2025. Over the same period, the number of judges increased by only 13.83%.
The Appellate Division shows an even more troubling trend. In 15 years, pending cases there surged by about 354%, while the number of judges actually declined by 25%.
Supreme Court data show that in 2010, the High Court had 94 judges and 313,735 pending cases, with 69,306 cases disposed of that year. By the end of 2025, the number of High Court judges rose slightly to 107, but pending cases jumped to 659,246, an increase of about 110.13%. During this period, the number of judges increased by only 13.
In the Appellate Division, there were eight judges in 2010, with 9,141 pending cases and 1,583 disposals. By 2025, the number of judges dropped to six, while pending cases rose to 41,551, an increase of 354.51%.
However, despite fewer judges, case disposal in the Appellate Division increased. In 2025, the court disposed of 7,553 cases, about 377% higher than in 2010.
At present, a total of 113 judges serve across both divisions of the higher judiciary, while 700,807 cases remain pending. This places the average caseload at 6,202 cases per judge, a pressure that continues to rise.
Lawyers and legal experts say the backlog is driven by a failure to increase judicial appointments in line with rising case numbers, infrastructural limitations, and procedural delays. They stress the need for more judges, modernization of court management, and effective alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
Senior Supreme Court lawyer Ahsanul Karim told Agamir Somoy that judicial expansion must match population and case growth. He said prompt appointment of judges is necessary to accelerate case disposal.
Death references from lower courts are also heard in the High Court over extended periods. According to the Supreme Court’s death reference section, hearings on cases from 2018 are still ongoing in 2026 due to an insufficient number of benches.
Legal experts say the lack of judges and benches is prolonging trials and deepening frustration among litigants.
In high-profile criminal cases, governments often initiate expedited trials following public attention, resulting in landmark verdicts. However, execution of death sentences requires approval from the High Court, and convicted individuals frequently file appeals. These death references and appeals are heard in sequence over many years, but limited benches prevent timely hearings, delaying visible justice.
President of the Supreme Court Bar Association AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon told Agamir Somoy that judge shortages have crippled the Appellate Division. He said the court once operated with three benches, later reduced to two due to shortages, and now functions with only one bench. He added that the Appellate Division has become largely stagnant due to the lack of judicial appointments.
He further said procedural delays and shortage of judges sometimes result in prolonged detention of individuals, including the innocent. He stressed that many bail orders issued by the High Court are later stayed in chamber hearings, leaving cases unresolved for seven to eight years. He questioned why innocent people should remain in jail due to systemic delays.
He added that shortages of judges in both divisions and insufficient benches prevent people from accessing the highest court.
The legal expert said delays in hearing cases caused by judicial shortages are a serious barrier to justice and called for urgent appointments of sufficient judges in both divisions of the Supreme Court.
