e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary

Kshitiz Verma
LNMIIT Jaipur

Abstract. This paper enumerates the efforts made by the Supreme Court of India
and proposes a road map of how the existing Information and Communication Tech-
nology (ICT) can help Indian judiciary to evolve as more technology driven with
increased transparency. The main drive behind the efforts made by the Supreme
Court is through e-Courts project. The Government of India has unleashed huge
amount of funds to enhance the rate of justice and reduce the piling up of huge
number of cases in the courts in India. Various steps have been taken to utilize the
power of the Internet to ease the life of the litigant and all the other stakeholders
in the process. The efforts are specially targeted to help the poor. The e-Courts
project has led to scanning, digitization and digital preservation of case records,
enabling video-conferencing for courts and jails, etc. A major outcome of the e-
Courts project is the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG). It provides an online,
real time information on around 25 million pending cases in Indian courts are various
levels.
This paper also provides insights in the potential of ICT to be able to go far
beyond than what is proposed in the e-Courts project. The e-Courts project has
mainly provided a platform for the consolidation of the ICT infrastructure in the
courts. In order to be able to use all this computing machinery efficiently, more
services, beyond as envisaged in the e-Courts project have to be developed.

Keywords: Indian Judiciary, e-Courts Project, National Judicial Data Grid, Pend-
ing Cases.

1. Introduction

“Justice delayed is justice denied.” said the British prime minister

William E. Gladstone. This statement is very much true for Indian
Judiciary. Almost 27 million cases are pending in Indian courts, of
which roughly 8.4% are lying for more than ten years(Hindustan Times,
2016)(NJDG, 2018). In order to speed up the disposal of cases, Indian
Judiciary has started, on the initiatives of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of India, various projects to take help of the Information and Com-
munications Technologies (ICT) in the judicial sector. It is important
to understand the potential reasons for the delay before seeking any
solutions on the problem. For example, the number of judges may be
non-adequate some cases take longer than the others for some reasons.
Research needs to be conducted to find the current efficiency compared
to some optimal benchmark for disposal of cases. As of now, no such

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.1

2 Kshitiz Verma

benchmark exists. Hence, it is difficult to quantify how good or bad the

current pace of disposing cases is.
One of the reasons for pendency in Indian courts is high citizens
to judge ratio. According to a study, there is one judge per 73,000
citizens (Economic Times, 2018). The same study also reveals that
in most of the High Courts of India, on an average a judge spends
around 2.5 minutes to hear a case and about 6 minutes to decide a case.
This clearly implies that human capacity is a bottleneck in the battle
against slow justice as the judges are outnumbered by the number of
cases that they have to handle. This puts pressure on judges and is
known to be one of the primary reasons for mental stress of judges
(CJI Breakdown, 2016). Indian judiciary is known to work hard and
clear lots of cases per year but the sheer number is beyond the human
capacity of judges. It has been pointed out by one of the Chief Justice of
India that the number of judges need to be increased drastically. Apart
from appointing additional judges, more scientific ways of fast justice
for common human of India are to be sought so that the cases can be
decided in a timely manner, without compromising on the quality of
justice.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in order to increase the use of
ICT as one of the promising candidates for reducing pendency, created
an apex body, e-Committee (e-Committee, 2005) – to implement the
e-Courts project initiative in 2005 with a budge of |4.42 billion (equiv-
alent to roughly 100 million USD back then) (Action Plan Phase-I,
2005). The goal was to implement Information and Communications
Technologies (ICT) to speedup the process of deciding cases as well
as to provide a more transparent and easy access to justice. The term
e-Court has been coined for a court that is equipped with modern
ICT devices. For example, the judges are provided with LCD touch
screen machines to write the cases and comment upon them. There
are screens and projectors available connected through the local area
network (LAN) where it is possible for a lawyer to present the case using
a laptop. There are electronic boards available in the court premises
as well as online tools to display the queue of case numbers scheduled
for hearing in the courts on a particular day. The e-Courts project has
implementations beyond just computerization of courts. For example,
the delay in reaching summons is one of the big reasons for judicial
delay. Hence, summons are being sent using SMS on cellular phones
as well. Overall, many mechanisms for direct access of information to
the litigant are being deployed. There are also provisions for video
conferencing between jails and the courts as well as between courts
and courts. Apart from creating a physical ICT infrastructure for the
courts, many litigant centered services like e-filing of cases, bringing

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.2

 e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary 3

reforms by training judicial officers, digitization of legal tools, statute

laws and case laws, digital archives of cases, etc. are also being carried
out as a part of e-Courts project.
Appreciating the steps taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,
the then President of India, Dr. Abdul Kalam Azad had delivered an
influential speech, revealing the potential of e-Judiciary, at the event
of launching of computerization of courts by the Supreme Court(APJ
Abdul Kalam, 2007).
While much work has been done in last ten years since this initia-
tive, a lot remains to be done as far as the application of computer
science is concerned. With this goal of improvisation the Government
of India again released a fund of |16.70 billion (equivalent to roughly
400 million USD) (Action Plan Phase-II, 2014). e-Courts should lead
to e-Judiciary by judiciously interconnecting various organs of the so-
ciety, government, institutions and citizens providing seamless flow of
information between the above mentioned organs of democracy. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court has already laid down a solid foundation that
can be exploited by computer scientists to make a bigger impact.
A great leap in providing free access to the judicial information was
provided by the implementation of the National Judicial Data Grid
(NJDG, 2018). Anyone can view the status of the cases that are pending
and information related to past hearings that have taken place. The
National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), an important outcome of the e-
Courts projects, has data of almost 27 million pending cases. This data
can be studied in many ways to come up with the methods to increase
the rate of disposing the cases in a timely manner. True, having just the
data is not sufficient, it needs to be polished to reach a state such that
it can be used to help the judges in the process of making judgments.
The current state of art is a bit far from this ideal goal.
To aid to the efforts made by the Supreme Court for making the data
publicly available, use of big data analytics have been suggested(Judicial
Mess, 2013). Machine learning and natural language processing can be
used to find the similarity in the cases that are pending. This can help in
a faster disposal of cases as similar cases can be heard at the same time.
All the judgments that have been delivered by the Supreme Court and
various High Courts are already online(Judgment Information System,
2018). Once similarity between cases can be found, it becomes easier
to decide them which will ultimately speedup the process.

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.3

4 Kshitiz Verma

2. Relevant Global Initiatives

Many studies have been conducted and initiatives taken throughout the
world to use ICT in order to enhance the functioning of government
bodies. We are discussing some of the most noticeable efforts in this
section.

2.1. European Case Law Identifier (ECLI)

On the initiatives of the European Union Council of Ministers, the

European Case Law Identifier (ECLI) was introduced (Opijnen, 2011).
The rationale behind the initiative was to provide a uniform metadata
for case laws, to help in legal information retrieval. The idea is that
once the courts arrive at a question of law, they are advised to look
for the similar cases that have already been pronounced by the other
courts in European Union. For example, if a case appears in the courts
in Spain, and if such a question cannot be satisfactorily settled by the
cases decided in Spain, then the relevant cases in the member countries
of European Union should be searched. Since the idea of its adoption in
December 2010, the project has come long way and now it is expected
to gain even more momentum (Marc, 2016). The greater issues with
implementation of ECLI was that multiple governments have to collab-
orate to make it a reality. On the other hand, all of e-Courts project in
India under one authority so it is relatively easier administratively. So
the success of e-Courts and NJDG should be seen in near future. More
initiatives in Europe can be found in (Velicogna, 2007).

2.2. The United States Supreme Court Database (SCDB)

The United States Supreme Court Database (SCDB) was created by

Prof. Harold J. Spaeth with a grant received the from the National
Science Foundation of the United States (Spaeth, 2014). The data was
made available publicly in 1980s and since then the data has been
continuously improved. The data has been designed to be providing
data and information for researchers belonging to various different
communities, including but not limited to law professors, humanists,
policy makers, journalists, even some social scientists, and undergrad-
uates and law students. The data includes and classifies every single
vote by a Supreme Court Justice in all argued cases over more than a
period of five decades. Recently the data has been used by computer
scientists to study and predict the outcome of the cases (Katz, 2016).
It is worthwhile to note that if such a database can be build for Indian
Judiciary then it can help to reduce the backlog of cases.

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.4

 e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary 5

2.3. Supreme Court of Brazil

The Brazilian Supreme Court faces similar load as the Indian Supreme
Court in terms of the number of cases. Since 1988 more than 1.5
million cases have reached the court, which is comprised of eleven
Justices, mostly through appeal. The project Supremo 2.0 aims that
visualization of the high number of cases in a more interactive manner.
In (Chada, 2015), the authors have presented an architecture for the
visualization.

2.4. Other Initiatives

The role of ICT in Malaysian judicial system is discussed in (Bhatt,

2005). Open government initiatives by Kenya are discussed in (Monica,
2016). e-Judiciary platform for a rural community in the Eastern Cape
Province of South Africa is described in (Scott, 2010). However, the
ideas are at a much higher level and their exact implementation has
not been discussed.

3. The e-Courts Project

As briefed before, the main objectives of the e-Courts project is to bring

more transparency in judicial matters and to bring the judiciary closer
to the common litigant of India. The common litigant of India should
be able to access the judicial services without incurring the huge cost
that they have to bear today, despite being poor. According to a survey
(Daksh Report, 2016), 90.1% of the litigants have annual income less
than |300,000 (roughly US $4500). Thus, from the beginning, the e-
Courts project has concentrated on citizen centric services to reduce the
inconvenience occurring to the common human of India due to judicial
procedures. We enumerate some of the deliverables of the project. Many
of them are also listed on the e-Courts project website (e-Courts, 2016).
For a detailed information on e-Courts project, refer to (Action Plan
Phase-I, 2005; Action Plan Phase-II, 2014; e-Courts, 2016).

1. Citizen Centric Service: This is the most important objective. The

goal is to provide efficient and time-bound citizen centric service
delivery. The citizens should be able to feel the part of the system.
The information that they require and which concerns them should
be available to them without any hassle, including timely justice.
As elaborated on the website of a civil society organization that
undertakes research and activities to promote accountability and
better governance in India, Daksh (Understanding Pendency, 2016),

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.5

6 Kshitiz Verma

the ultimate goal should be to reduce pendency to a level that can

be considered acceptable by the most important constituent of the
litigation process: the litigant.
2. Decision Support Systems: To develop, install and implement de-
cision support systems in courts, i.e., proper mechanisms need to
be developed to use the ICT infrastructure in the court that sup-
port in dissemination of judicial decisions efficiently. For example,
the judgments are to be uploaded to the cloud so that they can
accessed publicly. In order to make sure this happens, a uniform
case nomenclature must be designed and the judgments must be
uploaded on time. This will not happen automatically. The system
is supposed to aid in this process too.
3. Transparency of Information Access: One of the biggest challenges
that the judiciary in India, or for that matter any where in the
world, faces is to show it is transparent. As mentioned in the na-
tional policy itself (Action Plan Phase-I, 2005) that those who are
beneficiaries of the current non-transparent system may resist the
changes. Automation of certain tasks, in particularly the data that
is made available publicly is the key to provide transparency of
information access to its stakeholders, including the litigant. This
will ensure that no human, beneficiary or otherwise, is involved,
achieving greater transparency.
4. Justice Delivery System: To enhance judicial productivity both
qualitatively and quantitatively, to make the justice delivery system
affordable, accessible, cost effective and transparent. As discussed
before, a common litigant in India is very poor and generally cannot
afford the expense of the justice delivery system. In order to have
the fruitful impact of the e-Courts project, the whole system has
to be made accessible and transparent to the general public. This
will increase the confidence in the system.
5. Court Management and Case Management System: Due to sheer
population, the Indian Judiciary faces lots of problems, including
the management of cases and the courts themselves. It is envisaged
to make policy for managing case loads in the e-Court project so
that effective Court Management and Case Management can be
administered. To this end, Case Information System (CIS) is being
developed to manage the court cases centrally.
6. Interoperability and Compatibility: Indian Judiciary is in a process
of making most of its organs modern. They are supposed to be
more transparent, automated to some extent. All such softwares

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.6

 e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary 7

may be designed by different teams with different mindsets. It is

crucial to provide interoperability and compatibility with National
Case Management System; Inter-operable Criminal Justice System,
National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and other programmes
to enhance the quantity and quality of Justice Delivery System.
7. Improving Legal Awareness: According to (Daksh Report, 2016),
more than 80% of the litigants have not attended a university
or a college. This amalgamates with the poverty and leads to a
completely ignorant human being with respect to the rights they
possess. One of the achievements of the e-Courts project will be
to bring the judicial procedures closer to common man, directly
accessible from reliable sources, rather than depending on the man-
in-the-middle who may take their unfair advantage.

4. National Judicial Data Grid

The National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) is a monitoring tool that

can be used to identify, manage and reduce the pendency of cases. It
provides real time data for the number of pendencies. Figure 1 provides
a snapshot of NJDG as on April 5, 2018. It can be seen that lots of
information is already available to the litigants as well as to the general
public. One can see the cases disposed and filed in last month. It can
be noted that separate statistics are shown for the cases that are more
than ten years old. The disposed cases are also classified into civil and
criminal cases. The registration status of the cases are shown as well
as the pending cases are shown. The total pending cases, roughly 27
million, are classified in four categories listed below and Figure 1 shows
an instance of the percentage of such cases on April 5, 2018.
1. Less than two years (46.92%)
2. Over two years (28.71%)
3. Over five years (15.95%)
4. Over ten years (8.42%)
Classification of pending cases by women and senior citizens are
also available. Monitoring Alert (not visible in the figure shown here),
is also shown in which the cases listed on the day of viewing and the
total number of courts/judges are also shown.
In the top left, there is a provision for navigation by states and union
territories. The portal, as on April 5, 2018, shows the corresponding

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.7

8 Kshitiz Verma

Figure 1. A snapshot of the National Judicial Data Grid as on April 5, 2018.

data as described above for the district judiciary of 32 states and union
territorie1s in India. The portal also provides a zoomed in information
of data. For example, if one clicks on “241940” in Figure 1 then the
cases disposed in last month in various states and union territories can
be seen. It can be zoomed even further and one can get up to the court
level to find the number of pending cases. This already provides a huge
amount of data to study that can help in improving the judicial system.
A similar portal exists for various High Courts as well (HC-NJDG,
2016). As mentioned by Justice Madan Lokur of the Supreme Court of
India, NJDG for High Courts will bring out a great deal of transparency
in the functioning of the courts and in checking the pendency (Game
Changer, 2016).
As shown in Figure 2, it is possible to see the pendency of cases at
a finer granularity. In this case, the pendency for various districts in
the state of Himachal Pradesh are shown, as on April 5, 2018. We have
chosen Himachal Pradesh for this particular figure because it has lesser
number of districts and can be easily seen in the picture. A similar
graph can be seen for all the states and even districts in each state.
NJDG will be required to improve over time. In order to really help
deciding the pending cases, more classification than the current one is
required. Various machine learning and clustering approaches can help
in achieving this goal as discussed in the next section.

5. Improving the State of the Art

The previous sections have discussed the initiatives taken by the Supreme
Court of India to bring judicial reforms. The central entity to such

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.8

 e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary 9

Figure 2. A snapshot of the district-wise pending cases in the state of Himachal

Pradesh as on April 5, 2018.

reforms has been the litigant. While the initiatives of the Supreme
Court are extraordinary in their own respect, they may lead to under-
utilization if more research into the same is not promoted. To this end,
in this section, we elaborate how computer science can help achieve the
ultimate goals of the Supreme Court’s initiatives.
Some of the areas where computer science can be of great help to the
judiciary are discussed below. They consider one aspect of the proposed
research – scheduling of court cases.

5.1. Design of Efficient Algorithms for Scheduling of

Cases

We already know from the studies conducted that a lot of time is wasted
in proceedings and hearings that do not take place on the scheduled
day (Daksh Report, 2016). For example, as available on e-Courts web-
site roughly 541,000 cases were listed on 29th July in 18,152 courts.
However, not all of them get a chance of hearing. If all the listed cases
were heard, the pendency will reduce drastically. In fact, according to a
study (though not representative and at a very small scale) conducted
in (Time Motion Study, 2016), only 6 out of 50 listed cases were heard.
This is due to the time spent in adjournments.
As discussed before, National Judicial Data Grid keeps a record of
the status of the pending cases. It is envisaged and has been developed
as a tool to help reducing the number of pending cases in the courts.
It provides very useful information at the case level. For example,

− the age of a case

− the information about the court in which the case is pending

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.9

10 Kshitiz Verma

− judge name, etc.

Given that such information exists, it will be underutilization of the
resources if the existing data is not studied to design a better scheduling
of the cases so that the timely disposal of the cases can be maximized.
For example, with all this information it is possible to classify related
cases that can be scheduled for hearing on the same date. Clearly, there
might be many more variables that govern the scheduling of cases, but
the sheer volume of the cases is so high that my conjecture is that one
can always find the number of cases to be scheduled together. This will
save the time of judges as even if the adjournments are to be made,
some cases will be disposed of for sure. Similarity of cases will have
lesser context changes enabling the judges to be better prepared. The
judges would be required to deal with the cases of a specific nature on
any given day instead of a huge possibility of anything related to any
law or act. This will enable them to study only the laws and judgments
related to the cases scheduled on the next day as they know what
questions of law they can expect from the scheduled cases.
From the above discussion, it is clear that in order to efficiently
schedule the cases, ways of classifying the cases have to be devised.
The next subsection elaborates on how to classify the cases.

5.2. Classification of Cases: Zipf Distribution?

National Judicial Data Grid is already a big leap in the presentation of

data on the pending cases. It has potential to change the way pending
cases were being handled in the courts until now. However, it can be
taken to the next level where it presents even more data. For example,
the classification of cases, as of now, is very naive. Only two kinds of
cases are listed in NJDG data, civil and criminal. The data can be
classified in a much better manner to provide more insights on pen-
dency. The cases can be classified based on relevance with the similar
judgments as well as the similarity between the pending cases.
While a better classification of cases already exists, it is not suf-
ficient. The courts have divided the types of cases but this is not
sufficient. Even if 25 million cases are divided into 20-30 classes, it
does not solve the problem. Mechanisms have to be designed to find
the similarities such that solving one case should mean multiple of
them are solved by citing the same law or the already decided cases,
if available. Mechanisms have to be designed to find the sections of
different acts and the articles of the Constitution of India to be applied
in the case at hand.
Like social and physical sciences, we may expect that such a huge
volume of pending cases follow a Zipf distribution, i.e., there must be

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.10

 e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary 11

very little number of Sections of the Acts that are responsible for most
of the litigations and most of the acts have little number of litigations.
In such a scenario, it is easier to find a related case that has already been
decided by the Supreme Court or any High Court. The subordinate
judiciary may just use those judgments to decide the case if such related
cases can be found. The cases can be sorted based on the applicability
of different laws and acts. Use of machine learning and natural language
processing may help in this process.

5.3. Visualization of Similar Cases

While technical mechanisms may be designed, one has to be careful

that the members of judiciary are not used to the jargon of computer
science. So the final output should be creating a graphical user interface
(GUI) which will help visualize the relationship between related cases
will really be a crux of all the solutions listed above. If the related cases
can be visualized then they can be scheduled together, saving a lot of
time and effort of all the stakeholders.
We acknowledge that finding whether a pending case is related to
some existing judgment is going to be a non-trivial task. To this end,
natural language processing is likely to play a big role but such kinds of
works have already begun. For example, (Schartum, 2016) studies ap-
plications of algorithms to law, (Curtotti, 2015) studies the readability
of legislative sentences using machine learning. Such techniques can be
enhanced and deployed to achieve our goals but exact details are left
as future work.

6. Conclusion

It is known that ICT can only assist and the true initiatives have to
come from the judiciary (Marc, 2016) and also that achieving progress
in India can be difficult unless judiciary is efficient (Justice Khehar,
2016). On the initiatives of the Supreme Court of India, Government
of India is investing huge amount of money for modernization of the
courts in India. Under the e-Courts project, the courts in India are
to be equipped with the state of the art computing machinery. Hence,
Indian Judiciary has already taken substantial steps on its part. There
is still, however, a long way to go as millions of pending cases are to be
disposed properly and timely without compromising on the quality of
justice. The mechanisms have to be so designed such that not only the
current backlog of cases reduces but also that no piling of the newly
registered cases occur. e-Courts project and its subsidiary projects are

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.11

12 Kshitiz Verma

a big leap in this direction and it is very much likely that they will
start producing the fruitful results in near future. At the same time,
the present implementation leaves a lot of room for the improvement.
In order to improve upon the state of the art, relatively new computer
science areas like machine learning, natural language processing, etc
can be used to better utilize the ICT infrastructure procured by the
courts.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge various members of judiciary

with whom he has interacted to get an understanding of the working
model of Indian Judiciary.

References

E-Committee, Supreme Court of India, available at:

http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/e-committee (Accessed 30 March 2018)
Hindustan Times (2016), Waiting for Justice: 27 Million Cases Pending in Courts,
4500 Benches Empty, available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-
news/waiting-for-justice-27-million-cases-pending-in-courts-4500-benches-
empty/story-H0EsAx4gW2EHPRtl1ddzIN.html (Accessed 30 March
2018)
The National Judicial Data Grid, available at:
http://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdg public/main.php (Accessed 30 March 2018)
Economic Times (2016), HC Judges get 5-6 Minutes to Decide a Case, avail-
able at: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/high-court-judges-get-just-
5-6-minutes-to-decide-cases-says-study/articleshow/51725395.cms (Accessed 30
March 2018)
Hindustan Times (2016), Chief Justice Breaks Down Before PM over Burden
on Judiciary, available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/pm-
assures-emotional-cji-of-govt-support-in-increasing-judge-strength/story-
EgEh9e7DkCgwyBOS5nI2PN.html (Accessed 30 March 2018)
Policy and Action Plan Document Phase-I of the e-Courts Project, available at:
http://hcraj.nic.in/action-plan-ecourt.pdf (Accessed 30 March 2018)
Abdul Kalam Azad. (2007), Evolution of e-Judiciary available at:
www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/pdfdocs/pres ejudiciary.pdf (Accessed 30 March
2018)
Policy and Action Plan Document Phase-II of the e-Courts Project, avail-
able at: http://www.sci.gov.in/pdf/ecommittee/PolicyActionPlanDocument-
PhaseII-approved-08012014-indexed Sign.pdf (Accessed 30 March 2018)
Can Big Data & Analytics clean up India’s Judicial Mess?, avail-
able at: http://centreright.in/2013/07/can-big-data-analytics-clean-up-indias-
judicial-mess/#.WISF6vmmXeQ (Accessed 30 March 2018)
The Judgment Information System, available at: http://judis.nic.in/ (Accessed 30
March 2018)

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.12

 e-Courts Project: A Giant Leap by Indian Judiciary 13

Opijnen, Marc van (2011), European Case Law Identifier: indispensable asset for
legal information retrieval,
Opijnen, Marc van (2016), Gaining Momentum. How ECLI Boosts Accessibility of
Case Law in Europe, Law via the Internet Conference
Spaeth, Harold and Epstein, Lee and Ruger, Ted and Whittington, Keith and Segal,
Jeffrey and Martin, Andrew D (2014), Supreme Court Database Code Book, Law
via the Internet Conference
Katz, Daniel Martin and Bommarito, II and Michael, J and Blackman, Josh (2016)
A General Approach for Predicting the Behavior of the Supreme Court of the
United States, arXiv preprint arXiv:1612.03473
Chada, Daniel M and Silva, Felipe A and Borges, Patrı́cia (2015) Visualizing
Brazilian Justice: The Supreme Court 2.0 Project, Proceedings of the 15th
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Bhatt, Jashpal Kaur (2005) Role of Information Technology in the Malaysian Judi-
cial System: Issues and Current Trends, International Review of Law, Computers
& Technology Taylor & Francis
Achode, Monica M (2016) Kenya’s Strides Towards an Open Government, Law via
the Internet Conference
Scott, MS and Muyingi, NH and Thinyane, M (2010) Investigation and Develop-
ment of an e-Judiciary Service for a Citizen-oriented Judiciary System in Rural
Community, University of Fort Hare Department of Computer Science, Alice
Daksh Access to Justice Survey, available at: http://dakshindia.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/05/Daksh-access-to-justice-survey.pdf (Accessed 30
March 2018)
e-Court India Services, available at: http://ecourts.gov.in/ecourts home/ (Accessed
30 March 2018)
Understanding Pendency, available at: http://dakshindia.org/understanding-
pendency/ (Accessed 30 March 2018)
The National Judicial Data Grid for High Courts, available at:
http://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/hcnjdg public/index.php (Accessed 30 March 2018)
“NJDG for High Courts is Going to be a Game Changer”, Justice Madan Lokur,
available at: https://barandbench.com/njdg-high-courts-game-changer-justice-
madan-lokur/ (Accessed 30 March 2018)
Time and Motion Study of Four District and Sessions Courts in
Bangalore, Karnataka, available at: http://dakshindia.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/DAKSH-TIME-AND-MOTION-STUDY-OF-
FOUR-DISTRICT-AND-SESSIONS-COURTS-3.pdf (Accessed 30 March
2018)
Schartum, Dag Wiese (2016), Law and Algorithms in the Public Domain, Etikk i
praksis-Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, Vol. 10, 1, Page 15-26
Curtotti, Michael and McCreath, Eric and Bruce, Tom and Frug, Sara and Weibel,
Wayne and Ceynowa, Nicolas (2015) Machine Learning for Readability of Leg-
islative Sentences, Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial
Intelligence and Law
van Opijnen, Marc (2016) Gaining Momentum. How ECLI Boosts Accessibility of
Case Law in Europe, Law via the Internet Conference
Velicogna, Marco (2007) Justice Systems and ICT - What Can be Learned from
Europe, Utrecht L. Rev. Vol. 3
“No Progress can be Made Unless Judiciary is Efficient”, CJI Khehar on Central
Selection Mechanism, available at: https://barandbench.com/arvind-datar-
central-selection-mechanism-cji-khehar/ (Accessed 30 March 2018)

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.13

14 Kshitiz Verma

”State of the Indian Judiciary - A Report by Daksh, available at:

http://dakshindia.org/state-of-the-judiciary-report/ (Accessed 30 March 2018)

paper.tex; 5/04/2018; 14:12; p.14