For Prelims: Constitutional adjudication, Appellate jurisdiction, Judicial pendency, Larger Bench
For Mains: Polity: Supreme Court and judicial system; Governance: Judicial reforms and pendency
Source:
The Hindu
5 facts for one-day exams
SSC, railway, police and teaching exams ask direct questions like these.
- The Supreme Court had 92,318 pending cases at the end of 2025.
- The proposed Constitutional Court would sit in Delhi.
- The proposed Constitutional Court would have about 11 judges.
- The proposal envisages four or five regional Courts of Appeal.
- In 2016, three Supreme Court judges framed 11 questions for a larger Bench.
The news
A proposal to split the Supreme Court of India into two separate bodies — a Constitutional Court and regional Courts of Appeal — has been revived in a public debate, as the apex court ended 2025 with 92,318 pending cases, its highest backlog ever and nearly 10,000 more than a year earlier. The idea, published as an opinion on November 14, 2026, argues that simply adding more judges to the existing structure will not solve the crisis because the court’s constitutional work is being crowded out by ordinary appeals.
Under the proposal, a lean Constitutional Court of about 11 judges sitting in Delhi would hear only constitutional cases and substantial questions of law. Four or five regional Courts of Appeal would handle the appeals that now flood the Supreme Court. The plan is not new: in 2016, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court framed 11 questions about whether the court had lost its way and referred them to a larger Bench. That reference remains unheard a decade later, which proponents of the split cite as evidence that the current system cannot reform itself from within.
Supreme Court reform proposal: why in the news?
An opinion piece published on November 14, 2026, has revived the proposal to split the Supreme Court into a Constitutional Court and regional Courts of Appeal, citing a record backlog of 92,318 cases at the end of 2025 and an unheard 2016 larger-Bench reference on the court's role.
What was the 2016 larger-Bench reference about?
In 2016, three judges of the Supreme Court questioned whether the apex court had lost its way by allowing ordinary appeals to overwhelm its constitutional function. They framed 11 questions and referred them to a larger Bench. A decade later, the reference has not been heard, illustrating the institutional inertia that the reform proposal seeks to address.
How would the proposed division work?
The proposed Constitutional Court would have about 11 judges based in Delhi and would hear only constitutional cases and substantial questions of law. Four or five regional Courts of Appeal would take over the appellate workload that currently reaches the Supreme Court. The aim is not to reduce the judiciary's reach but to sort cases by category so that constitutional matters receive focused attention, rather than being decided in the same queue as routine appeals.
Proposed division of judicial work
| Feature | Constitutional Court | Regional Courts of Appeal |
|---|---|---|
| Proposed number | One court | Four or five courts |
| Principal work | Constitutional cases and substantial legal questions | Appeals reaching the Supreme Court |
Supreme Court reform proposal: facts and terms for exams
- Constitutional adjudication:
- Judicial determination of questions involving the interpretation or application of the Constitution.
- Appellate jurisdiction:
- The authority of a court to hear appeals against decisions of a lower court or tribunal.
- Judicial pendency:
- Cases before a court that have not yet been finally disposed of.
- Larger Bench:
- A Bench with more judges than the Bench referring a question to it.
Supreme Court reform proposal: why it matters for exams
Exams: UPSC
Syllabus: Polity: Supreme Court and judicial system; Governance: Judicial reforms and pendency
Common mistake: Examiners may present the proposed regional Courts of Appeal as already established; they are a suggested reform, not an implemented arrangement.
Mains question on Supreme Court reform proposal
The proposal to split the Supreme Court into a Constitutional Court and regional Courts of Appeal seeks to address judicial pendency. Critically examine the merits and challenges of such a restructuring in the Indian context.
Stuck? Get it in one tap
The Supreme Court handles constitutional questions as well as appeals against earlier decisions. A proposal suggests assigning constitutional cases to a Delhi court and appeals to regional courts. The aim is to sort the workload; the proposed division has not been implemented.
- Polity: Supreme Court and judicial system
- Governance: Judicial reforms and pendency
Related concepts: Constitutional adjudication, Appellate jurisdiction, Judicial pendency, Larger Bench
Practice questions
Pick an answer, then read the explanation.
- Q1Easy
Which institution is at the centre of the proposed separation of constitutional work from ordinary appeals?
Explanation: The proposal concerns restructuring the work currently reaching the Supreme Court of India. The Constitutional Court and regional Courts of Appeal are proposed components, while the larger Bench is associated with the earlier reference.
- Q2Hard
Consider the following statements about the Supreme Court reform proposal:
- 1.The proposed Constitutional Court would sit in Delhi.
- 2.The proposed regional Courts of Appeal would hear only constitutional cases.
- 3.A three-judge Bench framed 11 questions in 2016 and referred them to a larger Bench.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Statements 1 and 3 are correct: Delhi is the proposed seat, and three judges framed the questions in 2016. Statement 2 reverses the proposed allocation: regional courts would handle appeals, while the Constitutional Court would hear constitutional cases and substantial questions of law.
- Q3Medium
How many cases were pending before the Supreme Court of India at the end of 2025?
Explanation: The Supreme Court had 92,318 pending cases at the end of 2025. The other figures differ from that recorded total.
- Q4Medium
What is the principal objective of the proposed separation of the Supreme Court's constitutional and appellate work?
Explanation: The proposal seeks to separate constitutional work from the appeals that crowd the apex court's docket. Ordinary appeals would go to regional appellate courts, while the proposed Constitutional Court would hear constitutional cases and substantial questions of law; increasing judge strength alone is not the proposed remedy.
Frequently asked questions
1. What is the proposed Constitutional Court for India?
A proposed court of about 11 judges in Delhi would hear constitutional cases and substantial questions of law.
2. What would the proposed regional Courts of Appeal handle?
Four or five regional courts would handle appeals that currently reach the Supreme Court.
3. How many cases were pending in the Supreme Court at the end of 2025?
The Supreme Court had 92,318 pending cases, nearly 10,000 more than a year earlier.
4. What was the Supreme Court's 2016 larger-Bench reference about?
Three judges framed 11 questions concerning the Supreme Court's role and referred them to a larger Bench.
All sources
- Original14 November 2026 · Read story
