In every broken system, there comes a moment when the pitch deck arrives before the policy fix. Criminal justice is no exception.
From artificial intelligence-based legal assistance to digitised grievance portals, technology is now being framed as the cornerstone of criminal justice reform.
Of course, interventions such as the expansion of e-filing systems and court record digitisation have meaningful potential in democratising access to justice. By reducing the need for physical presence, minimising travel costs and allowing litigants to access case updates and orders remotely, these tools enhance transparency and make legal processes more accessible.
But their adoption is uneven.
While the broader narrative remains focused on finding revolutionary solutions, the ground reality inside police stations, courtrooms and prisons is different. These mechanisms continue to fail beneficiaries – largely due to poor implementation, inadequate staff and the lack of political will.
Instead of strengthening institutional capacity or evaluating existing legal and social remedies, the push is toward chasing the next prototype. In this race for innovation, it is easy to forget that justice is not a startup.
Promise, patchiness and pitfalls
The India Justice Report 2025 is a detailed account of the gaps in the criminal justice system’s embrace of technology. The report was produced through the collaborative efforts of academic centres, think-tanks and nonprofits.
For instance, the report found that 17% of police stations have not yet complied with the Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling that all police stations must install CCTV cameras with audio-visual capabilities, night vision and adequate storage. The home ministry’s latest Data on Police Organizations, as of January 2023, records compliance only in terms of whether there is at least one CCTV camera in each police station.
Full CCTV coverage was achieved in just eight states and Union Territories, showed the justice report’s analysis of this data. States like Manipur reported a mere 4% coverage. Puducherry and Lakshadweep had zero CCTV coverage. In any case, these figures indicate that cameras have been installed, not that they are functional.
The report also assessed citizen-facing portals based on 10 parameters, such as tracking the status of first information reports and complaints. However, no universal benchmarks, such as standard response times, or accessibility norms, were available to assess performance. There is also no usage data like traffic, resolution timelines, or satisfaction metrics.
This makes it difficult to gauge whether these platforms are being used effectively or meeting public needs.
In the prison system, the number of jails with at least one video conferencing facility increased from 808 in 2019 to 1,150 in 2022. But given the overcrowding, one video conferencing facility per prison is itself inadequate. Seven states and Union Territories still showed under 70% of their prisons had video conferencing facilities.
Even where video conferencing exists, usage purposes vary: 607 prisons used it for both remand and trial hearings, while 37 used it for trial only and 242 for remand, impeding the full potential of such technological initiatives. Similarly, e-Mulaqat, the digital platform for family visits, accounted for just 7% of total visits in 2022. These problems indicate infrastructural or access barriers and poor digital literacy.
Illusion of ‘fast’ innovation
Prisons and police stations often struggle with server crashes, expired logins and little to no tech support. These are not teething troubles but design flaws based on an urban, resource-rich imagination of innovation.
The growing obsession with artificial intelligence solutions assumes seamless connectivity and digital literacy – an assumption that is not just exclusionary, but dangerous in spaces of justice.
A single glitch or a missed entry, could derail a prisoner’s right to liberty. Contrast that with a simple, durable paper-based resource that is unaffected by outages or updates, yet capable of lasting for years.
The movie Shawshank Redemption follows the life of a wrongfully imprisoned man finding hope in books and handwritten knowledge. Andy Dufresne survives incarceration through his financial acumen and leaves behind a tattered library. It is a reminder that knowledge, even in confinement, can be passed on – dog-eared, but dependable.
It is one thing to build a portal but another to ensure its continued use, maintenance and effectiveness in environments where electricity is patchy, connectivity unreliable and staff overburdened.
A portal is only as effective as the clerk or officer expected to update it, often someone already stretched thin, with limited training. If technology increases workload or creates parallel paperwork rather than replacing inefficient processes, its value must be questioned.
If technology is to serve, it must be reimagined through the lens of slow technology, such as tools that operate offline, protect user confidentiality and function without collecting data that could be misused.
These are precisely the kinds of innovations that receive little attention, in part because they do not dazzle. A measured, systems-oriented approach is a reminder that real reform is rarely glamorous, but always grounded.
Ankita Sarkar is a lawyer working at the intersection of access to justice, gender and technology.
