Swift Justice in Modern Courts: The Authoritativeness of Accelerated Trials Amid Judicial Backlog

The persistent backlog of cases in Indian courts has renewed scholarly and policy interest in accelerated-trial mechanisms as a route to timely justice. This study examines how expedited procedures — fast-track courts, day-to-day hearings, and statutory timelines — affect both the speed of disposal and the perceived authoritativeness of the resulting judgments.

Using a doctrinal method supported by recent procedural reforms and reported case data, the paper argues that while acceleration measurably improves clearance rates, its legitimacy depends on preserving procedural fairness — most defensible where it removes avoidable delay rather than where it curtails a substantive hearing.

The findings suggest a calibrated model in which speed and due process are treated as complementary rather than competing objectives.