Syllabus: GS- I & V: Polity & Governance 

Why in the News? 

A recent analysis of judicial pendency data from the National Judicial Data Grid (2025) has revealed that over 5.34 lakh cases are pending in Assam’s subordinate courts — shining a spotlight on one of the Constitution’s most fundamental promises: equality before the law under Article 14.

Constitutional Foundation

• Article 14 of the Indian Constitution states that the State shall not deny to any person — citizen or non-citizen — equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within India. 
• It has two parts working together:
  • Equality before the law — borrowed from British common law, it means no one is above the law; the same law applies to everyone.
  • Equal protection of the laws — borrowed from the American Constitution, it allows the State to treat different groups differently, but only when there is a reasonable and intelligible basis for doing so.

In simple words: the law treats everyone the same in like circumstances, but it can also recognise real-world differences to ensure fairness — for example, reservations for disadvantaged communities.

Application in Assam

1. The National Register of Citizens (NRC): It is a register that lists genuine Indian citizens residing in Assam. It was last updated in 2019 under the direct supervision of the Supreme Court, as mandated under the Citizenship Act, 1955 and The Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003.

• Out of approximately 3.29 crore applicants, the final list included 3.11 crore persons.
• About 19.06 lakh applicants were excluded and given the opportunity to approach Foreigners’ Tribunals — quasi-judicial bodies set up under the Foreigners’ Tribunals Order, 1964 — and thereafter, higher courts.

The NRC exercise tested Article 14 in a very real way: it had to apply uniform standards to millions of people while also accounting for huge variations in documentation, literacy, and socio-economic backgrounds. The availability of appeals and judicial oversight was the safety net that kept the process constitutionally grounded.

2. The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA): It gives the armed forces special powers — including the right to arrest without a warrant and use force — in areas declared “disturbed.” 

• Critics have long argued that it creates a parallel legal universe where equality before the law becomes difficult to enforce.
• Assam’s story here is actually one of gradual improvement. As of 2025, AFSPA applies only to select districts — Tinsukia, Charaideo, and Sivasagar — a dramatic reduction from earlier decades when much of the State was covered. 
• This phased withdrawal reflects a more stable security environment and a government commitment to bringing more of the State fully under the regular rule of law.

3. Reservations and Affirmative Action: Article 14 does not demand mechanical uniformity. 

• The Constitution itself, through Articles 15(4) and 16(4), permits the State to make special provisions for SCs, ScTs, and OBCs in education and public employment. 
• In Assam, with its rich diversity of communities — including large tribal populations like the Bodos — these provisions are not exceptions to equality; they are equality in action, correcting historical disadvantages.

Justice Backlog

A constitutional guarantee is only as strong as the institution that enforces it. The 2025 data paints a sobering picture:

• 5.34 lakh cases pending in subordinate courts (including 1.09 lakh civil and 4.25 lakh criminal).
• Over 65,000 cases pending for more than five years — a direct denial of the right to timely justice.
• The Gauhati High Court — the apex court for Assam and the Northeast — had 52,445 pending cases as of February 2025.

Justice delayed is, in constitutional terms, equality denied.

In response, the Gauhati High Court Mediation Centre, in collaboration with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre, launched Mediation for the Nation Drive 2.0 in 2026 — a 90-day nationwide initiative to settle disputes outside formal courts. Mediation is a voluntary, confidential process where a neutral third party helps disputing parties reach a mutually acceptable resolution — faster, cheaper, and less adversarial than litigation.

Key Takeaways for the Exam

• Article 14 guarantees both formal equality (same law for all) and substantive equality (reasonable classification is allowed).
• The NRC process — supervised by the Supreme Court — is an example of a large-scale administrative exercise tested against Article 14’s standards; Foreigners’ Tribunals are the adjudicatory mechanism for excluded persons.
• AFSPA’s reduction in Assam is a marker of improving security and a step toward fuller rule of law.
• Judicial pendency remains the most practical barrier to equality before the law for ordinary citizens.
• Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) are increasingly part of the constitutional ecosystem to make justice accessible.

Mains Question “Equality before the law in India is both a promise and a process.” Critically examine this statement with reference to Assam’s experience in implementing Article 14.

From the NRC corridors to Foreigners’ Tribunals, and from AFSPA-designated districts to overburdened lower courts, Assam’s journey with Article 14 is less a finished story and more a living, evolving constitutional conversation — one that the nation watches closely.

SOURCE