Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal introduced legislation in the Lok Sabha on Monday to raise the Supreme Court’s sanctioned strength to 38 judges, including the Chief Justice, as Opposition protests disrupted the opening day of Parliament’s Monsoon Session.
The Supreme Court Amendment Bill, 2026, seeks to replace an ordinance promulgated on May 18 that increased the number of judges other than the Chief Justice from 33 to 37. Meghwal moved for leave to introduce the measure amid sustained sloganeering from Opposition benches.
The legislation proposes an amendment to the Supreme Court Act, 1956, which determines the maximum number of judges who may serve on the country’s highest court. Parliamentary approval is required to maintain the expansion after the ordinance ceases to operate.
The Union Cabinet approved the proposal on May 5, citing the need to strengthen the court’s capacity and improve the speed of justice delivery. Once enacted, the amendment will add four positions to the sanctioned strength of 34 that existed before the ordinance.
The increase is intended to allow the Supreme Court to constitute more benches and handle a growing volume of constitutional, civil, criminal, commercial and public-interest litigation. The court also considers appeals and special leave petitions arising from judgments delivered by High Courts and tribunals across the country.
Judicial capacity has become a central policy concern as the Supreme Court’s pending docket has remained at tens of thousands of cases despite improvements in filing systems, digital access and disposal rates. The institution must balance routine appeals with Constitution Bench matters, election disputes, questions of federal authority and cases involving fundamental rights.
Four additional judges could permit the formation of two more two-judge benches when the court is functioning at full strength. The practical effect will depend on how quickly the new vacancies are filled, the availability of courtrooms and support staff, and the distribution of cases through the roster system.
Appointments to the Supreme Court are made by the President after the names recommended through the collegium process are considered by the Union government. Raising the statutory ceiling does not automatically appoint judges. Separate recommendations, background checks, government processing and appointment notifications remain necessary.
The Supreme Court was established in 1950 with a Chief Justice and seven other judges. Parliament has periodically expanded its strength as litigation and the country’s population increased. The number of judges other than the Chief Justice rose from seven to 10 in 1956, to 13 in 1960, to 17 in 1977 and to 25 in 1986.
A 2009 amendment raised the number of judges other than the Chief Justice from 25 to 30. Parliament increased it again from 30 to 33 in 2019, taking the total sanctioned strength to 34. The 2026 measure represents the first expansion since that change.
Supporters of a larger court argue that additional judges can reduce waiting periods, improve the handling of older cases and give the institution greater flexibility to form Constitution Benches of five or more judges. Such benches are required when substantial questions involving constitutional interpretation arise.
Legal policy specialists have also cautioned that increasing sanctioned posts cannot, by itself, resolve delays. Case-management reforms, limits on repeated adjournments, better filtering of matters, timely appointments and stronger judicial infrastructure are considered equally important. A significant share of the court’s workload consists of special leave petitions, many of which are disposed of at the preliminary stage.
The Bill’s introduction came as the government attempted to begin legislative business despite Opposition demands for discussions on examination governance, alleged irregularities involving religious institutions and other contentious issues. Slogans continued while Meghwal completed the formal procedure for introducing the measure.
Introduction is the first stage of the parliamentary process. The Bill must be considered and passed by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha before being presented to the President for assent. It may be taken up for discussion during the session or referred for further examination, depending on the government’s legislative scheduling.
The ordinance already provides legal authority for a total strength of 38, preventing an immediate gap while Parliament considers the replacement legislation. Under the Constitution, an ordinance must be approved by Parliament within the prescribed period after the Houses reassemble, or it will cease to operate.
