S Ahmad
The e-Courts Mission Mode Project has transformed India’s paper-based judiciary into a digitally enabled and trackable justice delivery system. Since 2014, both case filings and disposals have nearly tripled, with courts consistently disposing of more cases than are filed each year. Over 753 crore pages of court records have been digitised, while thousands of e-Sewa Kendras are helping bridge the digital divide by expanding access to judicial services. Together, these reforms are making the justice system faster, more transparent, and more accessible to everyone.
From paper files and endless visits to e-filing, virtual hearings and AI-assisted research, the e-Courts Mission is changing how citizens experience the justice system—but the real test will be whether technology makes justice not only faster, but more equal and humane
For generations, the Indian courtroom has been associated with paper files, long queues, repeated visits, crowded corridors and the uncertainty of waiting for the next date. For a litigant, a court case has rarely been only a legal battle. It has also meant travel, lost working days, photocopies, paperwork, procedural confusion and the constant dependence on intermediaries to understand what is happening in a case.
That picture is changing.
India’s judicial system is undergoing a transformation that is less visible than the construction of a new courthouse but potentially far more consequential. The e-Courts Mission Mode Project is steadily moving the justice delivery system from a predominantly paper-based architecture towards a digital, connected and increasingly data-driven ecosystem.
The significance of this transformation goes beyond computers being placed inside courtrooms. It is about redesigning the relationship between citizens and the justice system.
Since 2014, case filings and disposals have nearly tripled, while courts have consistently disposed of more cases than are filed each year. More than 753 crore pages of court records have been digitised. Thousands of e-Sewa Kendras are bringing digital court services closer to citizens who may otherwise struggle to navigate online systems. More than four crore remote hearings have been conducted through video conferencing, while e-filing has enabled more than 1.25 crore cases to be filed digitally since its inception.
These numbers are impressive. But their real importance lies in what they represent: an attempt to make justice less dependent on physical presence, paper movement and geographical distance.
From computerisation to a connected justice system
The e-Courts journey did not begin with artificial intelligence. It began with a much more basic challenge—bringing technology into a judiciary that had historically depended heavily on physical records and manual processes.
The Government launched the e-Courts Mission Mode Project in 2007, with the objective of systematically digitising court processes and making judicial services more accessible, affordable and transparent.
The first phase, implemented between 2011 and 2015, concentrated on building the basic digital infrastructure. More than 14,000 courts were computerised, laying the foundation for technology-enabled judicial services.
The second phase, from 2015 to 2023, shifted the emphasis towards citizen-centric services. The National Judicial Data Grid, e-filing and e-Sewa Kendras emerged as important components of this phase. Video-conferencing infrastructure was expanded more than fivefold, opening the door to remote participation in judicial proceedings.
The third phase, which runs from 2023 to 2027, is more ambitious. It seeks to move towards digital and paperless courts, large-scale digitisation of legacy records, wider virtual hearings, greater interoperability between justice institutions and the use of technologies such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, analytics and optical character recognition.
This evolution is important. Digitisation is no longer simply about replacing a physical file with a PDF. It is increasingly about creating an interconnected justice ecosystem in which information can move securely between institutions and stakeholders.
That distinction matters.
A digital court is not necessarily a better court merely because it has computers. A genuinely modern justice system is one in which technology reduces unnecessary procedural burdens, improves access to information, strengthens accountability and allows judges, lawyers and court staff to spend more time on the substantive work of justice.
Making the invisible visible
One of the most significant innovations of the e-Courts programme is the National Judicial Data Grid, or NJDG.
For a long time, information about the functioning of courts was difficult for an ordinary citizen to access in a consolidated and understandable form. The NJDG has changed that by providing a public digital window into the judicial system.
The platform provides information on pending and disposed cases, categories of cases and stages of proceedings. It also offers information on reasons for delay, including non-availability of parties, pending documents, stays and other procedural factors.
This matters because transparency is not simply about publishing information. It is about making the functioning of an institution more visible.
A citizen should not have to depend entirely on physical visits or informal channels to know whether a case has moved forward, whether an order has been passed or how long a matter has remained pending.
The NJDG does not, by itself, solve judicial pendency. But it creates something essential for institutional accountability: visibility.
Data can help administrators identify patterns, High Courts can monitor judicial business, District Judges can assess workloads and policymakers can better understand where delays are concentrated.
In this sense, technology is creating a feedback mechanism for the justice system.
E-filing: The end of unnecessary journeys
Perhaps the most direct impact of digitisation is being felt through e-filing.
Earlier, filing a legal document could require a litigant or lawyer to physically visit a court, submit documents, correct deficiencies and return again. For people living far from district headquarters or High Courts, each such visit carried a financial and social cost.
The e-filing system has changed that equation.
Complaints, written statements, replies and other applications can be submitted electronically. The system supports online payments, e-signatures, electronic submission of vakalatnamas, application filing, portfolio management and dashboards for monitoring cases.
It also supports regional languages, an important feature in a country where language can itself become a barrier to accessing formal institutions.
The scale of adoption is significant. Since its inception and up to June 30, 2026, more than 1.25 crore cases have been filed through the e-filing platform. The e-payment system has processed transactions worth about ₹1,404 crore in court fees and ₹75 crore in fines.
But the deeper benefit is not the number of transactions. It is the reduction in friction.
Every unnecessary trip removed from the judicial process is a saving in time, money and effort. For a large law firm, that may be an administrative convenience. For a daily-wage worker, a farmer, a small trader or a family already under financial pressure because of litigation, it can be much more significant.
The courtroom without walls
The expansion of video conferencing has perhaps been the most visible demonstration of how technology can alter physical assumptions about justice.
A hearing no longer necessarily requires every participant to be physically present in the same building.
Video-conferencing facilities have been expanded across 7,553 establishments, including courts, prisons and hospitals. Courts across the country have conducted more than 4.18 crore remote hearings.
This has obvious implications for witnesses, prisoners, lawyers and litigants who may otherwise have to travel long distances.
The benefits are particularly significant in criminal justice. The Nyaya Shruti initiative enables accused persons, witnesses, police officials, prosecutors, scientific experts and prisoners to participate in proceedings virtually.
For prisoners, remote testimony can reduce the logistical difficulties associated with physical production in court. For experts, it can reduce travel and scheduling burdens. For witnesses, particularly those living far from the court concerned, remote participation can make the process less disruptive.
The expansion of virtual courts also demonstrates how digital systems can handle certain categories of cases more efficiently. Thirty-one Virtual Courts have been established for online adjudication of traffic challans, receiving 11.33 crore challans amounting to ₹1,135.79 crore.
The objective is not to make every proceeding virtual. Nor should technology become a substitute for judicial discretion or the importance of physical hearings where they are necessary.
The real opportunity is to identify where physical presence adds value—and where it merely adds delay and expense.
Digitising the past to protect the future
A modern justice system cannot function efficiently if its institutional memory remains trapped in ageing paper files.
India’s courts hold an enormous volume of historical records. Physical documents deteriorate, occupy valuable space and can take considerable time to retrieve. Digitising them is therefore not merely an administrative exercise. It is also an exercise in preservation.
More than 753 crore pages of court records have been digitised, while large-scale digitisation continues under Phase III.
Searchable digital records can transform legal research and case preparation. Instead of locating a file physically, relevant information can increasingly be retrieved electronically.
For judges and lawyers, this can mean quicker access to precedents and case histories. For court administrations, it can improve record management. For researchers, it can make the historical evolution of law more accessible.
The transformation is especially important because justice depends heavily on institutional memory. A court system that can preserve and retrieve its past more effectively is better equipped to administer the present.
Connecting the entire justice chain
Perhaps the most ambitious aspect of judicial digitisation is that the court is no longer being treated as an isolated institution.
The Interoperable Criminal Justice System, or ICJS, seeks to connect different pillars of the criminal justice system—including police, courts, prisons, prosecution and forensic institutions.
This means information such as FIRs, charge sheets, court orders and forensic reports can move electronically between relevant institutions.
Other digital platforms complement this architecture. The Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems computerises police processes. The Investigation Tracking System for Sexual Offences helps monitor investigations involving women and children. e-Sakshya supports the management of digital evidence. e-Summons enables electronic transmission of court summons. MedLEaPR digitises medico-legal examinations and post-mortem reporting. e-
Forensic supports digital workflows in forensic laboratories, while e-Prison provides a national digital network for prison management.
The significance of this interoperability should not be underestimated.
Justice can slow down when institutions work in silos. A police investigation may be completed, but the next stage can still face delays because documents have to move manually. A forensic report may exist but not reach the relevant authority quickly. A summons may remain pending because its physical delivery cannot be tracked efficiently.
Connecting these processes can reduce such gaps.
NSTEP, the National Service and Tracking of Electronic Processes, is one example. Its GPS-enabled system allows bailiffs to track the service of summons and notices electronically and in real time.
The larger idea is simple: justice should not depend on the speed at which a piece of paper moves from one office to another.
Bringing the digital court to the citizen
There is, however, a fundamental problem with digital transformation: not everyone is digitally empowered.
India’s digital divide is real. Many citizens, particularly in rural and economically vulnerable communities, may not have reliable internet access, devices, digital literacy or familiarity with legal technology.
This is where e-Sewa Kendras become critical.
Established within court complexes, these citizen assistance centres act as a bridge between the traditional and digital justice systems. They help citizens check case status and hearing dates, file applications, obtain certified copies, make e-payments, upload documents and understand virtual hearings.
They can also guide citizens towards free legal aid and assist with services related to virtual courts and video conferencing.
As of June 30, 2026, 49 e-Sewa Kendras were functional across High Courts and 2,535 across District Courts.
Their importance lies in one principle: digital justice must not become digital exclusion.
Technology should remove barriers, not create new ones.
A person who does not know how to upload a document should not be disadvantaged because the system has moved online. A litigant without reliable internet access should still have a meaningful way to access judicial services.
The e-Sewa model recognises this reality by combining digital infrastructure with human assistance.
The AI question has arrived
The next frontier is artificial intelligence.
Under Phase III, AI and machine learning are being introduced into areas such as legal research, case management, transcription, translation and document analysis. Of the ₹7,210 crore Phase III outlay, ₹53.57 crore has been earmarked for AI and machine-learning development in High Courts through 2027.
Several initiatives are already under pilot testing.
AI tools are being used to transcribe oral arguments in Constitutional Bench matters. LegRAA, or Legal Research and Analysis Assistant, is being developed to assist judges with legal research and document analysis. Digital Courts 2.1 seeks to give judges and judicial officers a single paperless interface for managing cases.
Voice-to-text technology and translation tools such as ASR-SHRUTI and PANINI could reduce the burden associated with dictation and multilingual judicial work.
The translation of judgments is another important development. Through the eSCR portal, judgments are being translated into 18 Indian languages. More than 83,000 judgments had been translated by March 2025, including 36,344 into Hindi.
Such initiatives could have profound implications for legal accessibility.
India’s legal system operates across multiple languages, yet much of the authoritative legal material remains inaccessible to citizens who do not read English comfortably. Better translation can narrow that gap.
But AI in the judiciary must be approached with care.
Artificial intelligence can assist a judge. It cannot replace judicial responsibility.
Algorithms can help locate precedents, identify patterns, transcribe proceedings or flag procedural defects. But the ultimate responsibility for interpreting law, assessing evidence and delivering a reasoned judgment must remain with the human judicial institution.
The principle should be clear: AI may assist justice, but it must never become an invisible decision-maker in justice.
Accuracy, explainability, privacy, cybersecurity and human oversight will therefore become increasingly important as these systems mature.
Efficiency is important, but justice is more than efficiency
There is a temptation to measure digital transformation entirely through numbers: how many files were digitised, how many hearings were conducted online, how many cases were e-filed or how many messages were sent.
These metrics matter. But justice cannot be reduced to a technology dashboard.
A court can become paperless without becoming faster. A case can be digitally tracked while still remaining pending for years. A hearing can happen through video conferencing without necessarily resolving the deeper reasons for delay.
The success of e-Courts must therefore ultimately be judged by the citizen’s experience.
Does a litigant spend less money to pursue a case? Can a lawyer access records more quickly? Can a witness participate
without travelling hundreds of kilometres? Can a citizen understand what is happening in a case? Can a judge access relevant material more efficiently? Can institutions identify delays before they become chronic?
If the answer increasingly becomes yes, then digitisation is achieving its purpose.
The unfinished task
The e-Courts Mission has already established substantial infrastructure. Under Phase III, 1,806 e-Sewa Kendras have been established across court complexes, 474 courts have been equipped for paperless operations and 538 for virtual courts. E-filing has reached 4,519 courts, while 7,553 establishments have video-conferencing facilities. Solar facilities have been installed at 1,626 court complexes to ensure reliable ICT infrastructure, and 6,895 courts have NSTEP facilities.
The scale demonstrates that judicial digitisation is no longer an experiment.
But infrastructure is only one part of the transformation.
The next challenge will be ensuring interoperability, cybersecurity, regular maintenance, adequate training and universal accessibility. Technology evolves quickly; public institutions cannot afford to build systems that become obsolete within a few years.
Training is equally important. More than 2,372 training programmes have been held, but digital competence cannot be treated as a one-time exercise. Judges, lawyers, clerks, police officials and other stakeholders need continuing support as systems change.
There is also the question of data protection. A digitally connected justice system necessarily handles highly sensitive personal and legal information. The more connected the system becomes, the more important robust cybersecurity and responsible data governance become.
Digital justice must therefore be secure justice.
A quieter revolution in public administration
The transformation of India’s judiciary is not dramatic in the way a new law or landmark judgment is. It is, instead, a gradual restructuring of the machinery through which justice is delivered.
A litigant checking a hearing date on a mobile phone may not think of it as judicial reform. A lawyer filing a petition from an office rather than travelling to court may see it simply as convenience. A prisoner appearing through video conference may experience it as a practical necessity.
But collectively, these small changes represent a profound shift.
The traditional court was organised around the physical movement of people and paper.
The emerging court is increasingly organised around the movement of authenticated information.
That is the real digital transformation.
India’s judicial system is too large, too diverse and too important to be transformed overnight. Technology cannot eliminate every cause of delay, nor can it substitute for judges, lawyers, court staff or sound institutional reform. But it can remove many of the unnecessary obstacles that have accumulated around the core function of justice.
The e-Courts Mission has begun doing exactly that.
The ultimate promise of digital justice is not that citizens will see more technology in courtrooms. It is that they will need to spend less time fighting the system simply to access justice.
If Phase III can build on the foundations already laid—while ensuring inclusion, security, transparency and meaningful human oversight—India could move towards a judicial system that is not only more technologically advanced, but genuinely more citizen-centric.
The measure of this transformation will not finally be the number of servers installed, files scanned or applications downloaded.
It will be much simpler.
Comments are closed.