ARTICLE TEXT

In July 2026 the Law Minister told Parliament that 4,639,476 cases were pending in the courts of Bangladesh as at 31 March 2026. Of these, 38,713 were in the Appellate Division, 522,331 in the High Court Division and just over four million in the subordinate courts. More than 377,000 civil cases had been waiting for over five years. Behind each number is a family, a business or an accused person whose life is on hold. This article examines why the backlog exists and what might reduce it.

The Arithmetic of Delay

The simplest explanation is arithmetic. Bangladesh has about 2,300 judges for a population of more than 170 million, roughly one judge for every 78,000 people. India, whose courts are themselves notoriously slow, has one for about 69,000. The Judiciary Reform Commission, which reported in February 2025, recommended raising the number of subordinate court judges to 6,000. The government has created 536 new posts and is recruiting 150 civil judges, useful steps that fall far short of the need.

But arithmetic is not the whole story. The Appellate Division, with only a handful of judges, disposed of more cases than were filed in the first eight months of 2026, cutting its pending list by about two thousand. That shows what focused management can achieve. It also shows the limits: the highest court is a small part of the total, and the real congestion lies below.

Why Cases Take So Long

Several features of the system generate delay. The Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 permit repeated adjournments, and courts grant them freely. Interlocutory appeals and revisions allow a determined party to pause proceedings for years. Service of process is slow and easily evaded. Witnesses fail to appear, and there is little sanction when they do not. Investigations are often incomplete when charge sheets are filed, so criminal trials stall. And in civil matters, land disputes, which make up a large share of the docket, are aggravated by poor records and overlapping registration and survey systems.

Lawyers also contribute. A profession paid by appearance has little incentive to finish cases quickly, and strikes and boycotts by bar associations close courts for days at a time. Litigants, for their part, sometimes prefer a pending case to an adverse judgment.

The Reform Agenda

The reform proposals of 2025 and 2026 address several of these problems. The Judiciary Reform Commission recommended an independent judicial appointments body, a separate Supreme Court secretariat, permanent High Court benches in every division to bring appellate justice closer to litigants, and a stronger legal aid system with mediation at its centre. Some of these have been attempted. The Supreme Court Judges Appointment Ordinance created an appointments council in January 2025, though Parliament repealed it in April 2026. A separate secretariat was established and then repealed. The permanent bench proposal faces the constitutional obstacle of the Eighth Amendment case.

Two reforms have survived and matter most for the backlog. The Legal Aid Services (Amendment) Ordinance 2025 made mediation mandatory before litigation in a range of family, financial and tenancy disputes, diverting cases from the courts altogether. And the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act 2026 introduced time limits for investigations and capped police custody, which should shorten the pre-trial phase of criminal cases.

Technology and Management

The e-judiciary project promises digital case management, electronic filing and virtual hearings. Pieces are already in place: online cause lists, e-bail bonds in nine districts, e-family courts in two, information centres at every Chief Judicial Magistrate’s court, and remote testimony by expert witnesses. The full project has been sent back for restructuring, a reminder that technology procurement in the public sector can be as slow as the courts it is meant to fix. When it arrives, its value will depend on judges using the data it produces to manage their lists: identifying old cases, limiting adjournments and setting realistic timetables.

What Would Actually Work

International experience suggests that backlogs fall when four things happen together. Judge numbers rise to a defensible ratio. Procedural rules are amended to restrict adjournments and interlocutory appeals, and judges enforce them. Cases that do not need a courtroom are diverted to mediation and administrative processes. And the courts publish performance data, so that delay becomes visible and embarrassing. Bangladesh has begun the first and third of these. The second requires political will to confront the profession. The fourth requires only the decision to do it.

Conclusion

Four and a half million pending cases are not a statistic but a measure of how far the constitutional promise of justice falls short in practice. Article 35(3) guarantees a speedy and public trial. For millions of litigants, the first word of that guarantee is the one that fails. The reforms now underway are a start. Whether they succeed will depend less on new laws than on whether judges, lawyers and government are willing to change how they work.

Sources

1. The Daily Star, Over 46 lakh cases pending across courts: Law Minister (July 2026): https://www.thedailystar.net/news/the-parliament-watch/parliament/news/over-46-lakh-cases-pending-across-courts-bangladesh-law-minister-4218096
2. The Daily Star, Courts grapple with shortage of judges (9 September 2025): https://www.thedailystar.net/news/bangladesh/news/courts-grapple-shortage-judges-3981411
3. The Business Standard, Appellate Division disposes of more cases than filed in first eight months of 2026: https://www.tbsnews.net/bangladesh/court/appellate-division-disposes-more-cases-filed-first-eight-months-2026-1541771
4. bdnews24, Judiciary Reform Commission submits report (5 February 2025): https://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/041ceaa0a063
5. BSS, e-Judiciary project status (May 2026): https://www.bssnews.net/special-stories/384287
6. Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 (as amended 2026), Bangladesh Laws: http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/act-details-1640.html