As long as a judge's appointment is the subject of a legitimate consultation by the collegium, the content or material it uses to form its opinion cannot be scrutinized by a court.

In 1665, a petit jury in Madras composed of twelve English and Portuguese jurors acquitted Ascentia Dawes, who was on trial for the murder of her enslaved servant.

In Presidency towns (such as Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras), Crown Courts employed juries to judge European and Indian defendants in criminal cases.

Outside of Presidency towns, Company Courts staffed by EIC officials judged both criminal and civil cases without the use of a jury.

[16] These provisions stipulated that criminal juries were only mandatory in the High Courts of Presidency towns; in all other parts of British India, they were optional and rare.

[16] Jury trials in India were gradually abolished during the 1960s, culminating with the 1973 Criminal Procedure Code, which remained in effect in the 21st century.

To separate the judiciary from the executive, the Sapru Committee suggested that judges have fixed salaries and tenures, and that they could only be removed for gross misbehaviour.

The committee appointed to deal with judicial questions as part of the Constituent Assembly in 1946 was influenced by the Sapru Report, though there was concern over the power given to the President.

In Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and some other states, judges are appointed from the pool of retired judicial officer either directly or through exam.

Section 20 of CrPC empowers the State Government to appoint Executive Magistrates (EM) in every metropolitan area and in every district.

Under Section 20(5) of Crpc, the Commissioner of Police (CP) can be appointed as EM, but only when the district is declared by state government as a Commissionerate.

[2] The Chief Justice of India recommended that the central government constitute a permanent body to avoid unnecessary delays.

The first NJPC was constituted on 21 March 1996 on the order of Supreme Court in the landmark judgment All India Judges Association v UOI.

It helps HC & States in (I)Testing their fitness, skills & knowledge by:-(II) Disposing of pending minor issues along with training, (III) Save extra time & expenditures and on the basis of results, their services are confirmed then they are posted as JM 1st Class or Civil Judge.

It is to be noted that during training they get only basic pay i.e., ₹77840 (in few states DA too) and perks & benefits provided post confirmation.

Entry-level positions in the Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class are generally considered probationary, or training posts.

After completing the probationary assignment, a candidate is posted either as Judicial Magistrate of First Class in the criminal side, or in the District Munsiff Court for civil appointments.

Temporary deputy posts for officers of certain judicial rankings provide similar perks and career allowances to comparable civil servants.

The institute[clarification needed] provides training to Subordinate Judiciary officers on topics that State Judicial Academies do not cover.

It acknowledged the problems of vacancies in trial courts, unwillingness of lawyers to become judges, and the failure of the apex judiciary in filling vacant HC posts.

The Court also wanted the Government of India to detail the work being done by the National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms.

Ordinary citizens have been imprisoned for espionage for overstaying their visa or straying across international borders, languishing in prison for years due to the slow redressal process.

[76] Lok Adalats is an informal, alternative mechanism that has been a success in tackling backlogs, especially in pre-litigation matters, settling cases before they enter the courts.

"[80] Economists Boehm and Oberfeld calculated that the backlog costs the Indian economy several percentage points of GDP.

[81] According to Transparency International, judicial corruption in India is attributable to factors such as "delays in the disposal of cases, shortage of judges and complex procedures, all of which are exacerbated by a preponderance of new laws".

[88] Union Minister of State, HRD, Upendra Kushwaha notes that only 250-300 families have sent judges to Supreme Court and there is negligible representation of women and Scheduled Castes in higher judiciary.

This reduces the faith of the citizens on the judicial system because of such mindsets of judges, who are not open to criticism for erroneous and irresponsible judgements.

[91] Furthermore, several male judges have granted bail to culprits accused of rape, showcasing misogyny and patriarchal mindsets, further fueling distrust.

On 19 February 2022, Pushpa Virendra Ganediwala, an additional judge for the Bombay High Court, was forced to resign after a series of poor judgements in several sexual assault cases, before she could be made permanent.

[94] Former Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, called the judiciary ramshackled and stated it was useless going to courts.