Are Lok Adalats Evolving? A Deep Dive into Grassroots Justice in India

The Indian judicial system is overloaded with many pending cases, so to avoid delay the lok adalats evolved. For many citizens,especially those from rural, low-income, or marginalized backgrounds, the formal legal process remains inaccessible due to procedural delays, high legal costs, and complexity. In this context, Lok Adalats, or People's Courts, have emerged as a vital mechanism to provide informal, speedy, and affordable justice. Introduced as part of India’s constitutional commitment to legal aid and access to justice, Lok Adalats aim to resolve disputes amicably through compromise. This paper critically examines the evolution of Lok Adalats, their operational framework, key case examples, challenges in practice, and future pathways for meaningful reform.

Legal Framework and Historical Context

Lok Adalats were institutionalized under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and draw authority from Article 39-A of the Constitution of India, which mandates the State to ensure equal justice and free legal aid. The Act empowers legal services authorities at the national, state, district, and taluk levels to organize Lok Adalats for the resolution of disputes, particularly civil matters and compoundable criminal cases. Sections 19 to 22B of the Act establish the structure, jurisdiction, and nature of Lok Adalats. Section 21 of the Act states that any award passed by a Lok Adalat shall be deemed a decree of a civil court and shall be binding on the parties.

Lok Adalats trace their origins to the traditional Indian panchayat system and were first organized in Gujarat in 1982. Their goal was to provide people-friendly, community-based alternatives to court proceedings. Today, Lok Adalats function in several forms, including regular Lok Adalats, permanent Lok Adalats for public utility disputes, mobile Lok Adalats to reach remote areas, and national-level sessions held periodically across India.(1)

The mechanism operates through compromise and does not follow the rigid procedures of the Civil or Criminal Procedure Codes. Awards passed by Lok Adalats are deemed to be decrees of civil courts and are final and binding on the parties without any scope for appeal

Judicial Interpretation and Case Law

Judicial interpretation has played a significant role in clarifying the scope, powers, and limitations of Lok Adalats. In State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh(2), the Supreme Court held that Lok Adalats cannot decide cases on merit and can only facilitate a settlement between the parties. If no compromise is reached, the matter is returned to the court.

In B.P. Moideen Sevamandir v. A.M. Kutty Hassan(3), the Court upheld the finality of Lok Adalat awards, stating that such awards cannot be reopened or appealed except in cases of fraud or misrepresentation. This judgment reinforced the integrity of the process and ensured that parties cannot bypass settled agreements.

In the case of Punjab National Bank v. Lakshmichand Rai(4), ruled that no appeal lies under Section 96 of the CPC against an award of the Lok Adalat, thus affirming its finality.

The Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh(2), clarified that Lok Adalats function purely as conciliatory bodies and not adjudicatory forums. 

In Kishan Rao v. Bidar District Legal Services Authority(5), the Karnataka High Court held that for a Lok Adalat settlement to be valid, all parties must be present and agree voluntarily. Compared to community courts in South Africa or village courts in Bangladesh, India’s model stands out for its statutory legitimacy but still lags in enforcement infrastructure and awareness.

These decisions reflect the judiciary's endorsement of Lok Adalats while simultaneously limiting their authority to consensual settlements, not adjudication.

Challenges and Limitations

Despite their potential, Lok Adalats face structural and procedural challenges. Enforcement of awards remains a major issue, as there is no dedicated mechanism to ensure compliance.(7) The scope of Lok Adalats is limited to certain types of cases, excluding serious criminal and constitutional matters. Additionally, public awareness about Lok Adalats remains low in many rural areas. In some cases, weaker parties are pressured into settlements, raising concerns about voluntary consent. A shortage of trained conciliators also affects the quality and fairness of settlements.(1)

Way Forward

To strengthen the relevance and efficiency of Lok Adalats, there is a pressing need to develop enforcement cells that can ensure the implementation of awards. Permanent Lok Adalats should be established in every district and taluk with proper infrastructure. Training programs on ethics, gender sensitivity, and negotiation techniques should be conducted for mediators. Public outreach through legal literacy campaigns can increase participation. The integration of digital platforms can also enhance the reach and accessibility of Lok Adalats.(7)

Conclusion

Lok Adalats have played a transformative role in democratizing access to justice. They reflect India’s commitment to ensuring justice for all, especially the disadvantaged. However, to remain effective in the changing legal landscape, Lok Adalats must evolve beyond their current limitations. With meaningful reforms in enforcement, training, outreach, and digitalization, they can continue to serve as a strong pillar of India’s grassroots justice system.

Reference

1. Dr. Deepa Singh, Exploring the Role and Challenges of Lok Adalats in the Indian Justice System, 15 J. ADVANCES & SCHOLARLY RES. ALLIED EDUC. 801 (2018).

2. State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh AIR 2008 SC 1209

3. B.P. Moideen Sevamandir v. A.M. Kutty Hassan, (2009) 2 SCC 198.

4. Punjab Nat’l Bank v. Lakshmichand Rai, 2000 SCC OnLine Del 337.

5. Kishan Rao v. Bidar DLSA, AIR 2001 Kant 407.

6. Anmol Kaur, A Critical Analysis of Legal Aid Services in India with Special Reference to Lok Adalats, 8 INT’L J. ADVANCED RES. DEV. (2023), 

7. Puja R, Analysis on Lok Adalats in India: Its Evolution, Impact and Challenges, THE LAWWAY WITH LAWYERS J., Vol. 22, Issue 22, May 24, 2025, State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh, (2008) 2 SCC 660.

   
   

DISCLAIMER- This article has been submitted by Sudeshna Mondal, trainee under the LLL Legal Training Program. The views and opinions expressed in this piece are solely those of the author.