Justice by the Numbers: 5 Key Stats Defining the Court’s Performance

Averages often hide the truth. While stating that the "average time to justice is 2.55 years" gives us a baseline, it doesn't tell the story of the litigant who waits a decade, or the one who gets a verdict in months. At truestat.dev, we ran an enhanced analysis on historical court data to look at the distribution of justice—from the busiest seasons to the efficiency gap between small and large benches.

1. The "Busy Season" is Longer Than You Think

The Data Insight: Our analysis of the month-wise judgment distribution reveals a clear seasonal peak.

• Busiest Month: April (Historical Peak Activity, 3517 judgements)

• The Trend: Activity sharply rises in the first quarter, peaking in April, before dropping off.

• Seasonality Breakdown
  • Busiest Month: April (3517 judgments)
  • Next 4 Busiest Months:
  - February: 3505
  - August: 3283
  - March: 3258
  - September: 3257

The Pattern: Activity ramps up through Q1, peaks in April, and then cools off.

The Takeaway: If you are tracking case flow, expect the highest velocity in early spring.

2. Historical Context: The Busiest Years

The Data Insight: To understand current performance, we must look at historical maximums.

• All-Time Peak: 2008 remains the busiest year on record, with a total of 2,619 judgments passed.

• The Leaderboard: The years immediately surrounding 2008 also feature in the top 5, indicating a specific era of high judicial output.

• Current Status: Current volume is significantly lower than these historical highs.

• Peak Historical Activity: • Peak Year: 2008 (2619 judgments) • Next 4 Busiest Years: - 2009: 2155 - 2019: 1810 - 2023: 1495 - 2007: 1449

The Context: The full historical timeline allows us to see how the current "recent decline" compares to the court's maximum output era. We are currently operating well below those historical highs.

3. Bench Size: The Efficiency Gap

The Data Insight: We analyzed the trade-off between the number of judges and the speed of the verdict.

• The Workhorses: The 2-Judge Bench handles the vast majority of case volume with an average wait of 2.43 years.

• The Bottleneck: The 3-Judge Bench is a statistical anomaly. Despite having fewer judges than a Constitution Bench, it has the longest average wait time at 2.89 years.

• Large Benches: The 5-Judge bench averages 2.48 years, proving that more judges do not necessarily mean longer delays—the 3-judge configuration is the specific outlier.

• Bench Size Impact (Wait Time vs Volume): • 2-Judge Bench: - Avg Wait: 2.43 years - Median Wait: 0.00 years - Case Volume: 19477 cases processed • 3-Judge Bench: - Avg Wait: 2.89 years - Median Wait: 1.00 years - Case Volume: 2864 cases processed • 5-Judge Bench: - Avg Wait: 2.48 years - Median Wait: 0.00 years - Case Volume: 3552 cases processed

The Anomaly: The 3-Judge Bench (2.89 years) takes longer on average than both smaller and larger benches.

The Workload: As shown in the dual-axis graph, 2-judge benches (grey bars) carry the weight of the system, while the 3-judge configuration (blue line spike) creates a noticeable efficiency bottleneck.

4. Time to Justice: Fast Track vs. The Long Haul

The Data Insight: The overall average time to justice is 2.55 years, but the distribution tells a deeper story.

• Fast Track: A distinct percentage of cases are resolved in under 1 year.

• The Long Haul: Conversely, we identified a "Delayed" cluster of cases that have remained in the system for over 10 years.

• The Reality: Most litigants should expect a timeline close to the 2.5-year median, but outliers on both sides are common.

• Time to Justice Overview: • Overall Average: 2.55 Years • 'Fast Track' (<1 Year): 17627 cases (52.5%) • 'Delayed' (>10 Years): 1505 cases (4.5%)

The Curve: Most cases are resolved within 1-4 years.

The Tail: The histogram shows a "long tail" of cases that stretch beyond a decade. This proves that while the system can be fast, the risk of becoming an outlier remains significant.

5. Recent Trends: A Sharp Decline

The Data Insight: Comparing the most recent operational periods reveals a downward shift in volume.

• The Shift: Between 2023 and 2024, the court saw a decrease of 1,363 cases.

• Percentage Change: This represents a significant double-digit percentage drop in year-over-year activity.

• Trajectory: The trend line for the last 3 years shows a cooling off in final judgments delivered.

• Recent Trend Analysis:
  • Trend (2023 -> 2024):
  Decrease of 1363 cases (-91.2%)
  • 3-Year Volume: 2022: 1423 | 2023: 1495 | 2024: 132

The Drop: Comparing the last two operational years, we see a distinct decrease of 1,363 cases.

The Visualization: The bar chart focuses specifically on the last 5 years, highlighting how the recent volume compares to the immediate post-pandemic recovery period.

Conclusion

By visualizing the full dataset, we move beyond simple anecdotes. The Supreme Court operates on a distinct seasonal rhythm, has clear historical peaks, and shows a consistent efficiency gap between its medium and large benches.

Explore more data-driven legal insights at truestat.dev.