Time courts became active, if not proactive

There’s no dearth of court observations that since a litigant hasn’t “come with clean hands” and concealed the material facts, his or her lawsuit is dismissed with exemplary cost. But there are as many judicial pronouncements in favour of such litigants regardless of the obvious ill effects on the opposite party: a victim of dispensation.

Should the justice system be blind and inactive even if it causes trauma to a litigant who has cried foul for he has been deprived of his rightful claim by unwarranted litigant.

It’s apt to recall what Lord Denning had said: “It’s all very well to paint justice blind, but she does better without a bandage round her eyes. She should be blind indeed to favour or prejudice, but clear to see which way lies the truth.”

The Indian Supreme Court recently recalled this dictum and said the “entire journey of a judge” is to “discern the truth” from the plethora of pleadings, documents and arguments of the parties.

There’s no gainsaying that justice isn’t possible without arriving at the truth.

There’s a small comparative study done by the top court two years ago saying “truth constitutes an integral part of the justice delivery system which was in vogue in pre-independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell the truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system.” This observation is limited to the litigant’s choice and not the judiciary’s methodology in sifting the facts from the heaps of lies.

Among legal circles it is well known that a person who gets bail in a criminal case and stay in civil litigation has won the half battle. It also means that the half legal battle has been lost by the other party who could be the winner at the end of dispensation that ends after decades.

There’s little doubt that the backlog of cases is a matter of serious concern for the litigants. Strengthening the judicial infrastructure and adding it with more judges are essential to cope with the situation, but misuse of injunction orders by an unlawful claimant could be lessened if the bandage that makes the justice blind is removed.

However, the court alone can take a call if a plea for injunction by a party is based on genuine documents.

Last but not the least, exemplary cost must be imposed so that using unfair means in a civil case too becomes a high risk job.

It’s high time the justice system became active if not proactive. It’s permissible.