Reported By:
| Edited By: Rohit Gandhi |Source: DNA |Updated: May 02, 2016, 06:45 AM IST
At a recent public forum, the Chief Justice of India, TS Thakur, in an emotion-charged speech, lamented that a judge in the Indian court system disposes of 2,600 cases per year whereas in the US, 9 Supreme Court judges settle 81 cases. He broke down as he spoke, pointing to the executive that the India rising story is unachievable with a system that is plagued with potholes.
'Justice delayed is justice denied' is one of the most quoted lines in the context of Indian judicial system. The recent speech by Justice Thakur has brought the problem of an overburdened judicial system into the public glare, once again. The challenge is not just the size of the judiciary but all system not designed to handle this much weight. It reminds me of the trucks that I find broken down or turned turtle on highways that have put in more weight than they can handle.
According to a Court News, 2014 report there are more than 44 lakh cases pending in the country's high courts. This figure touches three crore if we take into account all the courts of India. Why is there such a huge backlog of cases in the Indian judicial system? The problem that plagues the Indian judicial system and slows it down can be broken down into three areas of concerns.
Firstly, there are too many lacunas and gaps in Indian laws and acts resulting in filing of several frivolous cases, thus, increasing the number of litigations. For example, the property rights and the related tenancy rights in India are so ill-defined that there are large numbers of litigations surrounding property disputes.
Secondly, the legal proceedings are themselves, so complicated and ill-defined that the rate of clearing of cases is abysmally slow. In a case of 50 hearings, on on an average, there would be 10-15 adjournments on inconsequential grounds. Then, the judge would be absent for another 10 of those hearings. Thus, the number of effective hearings in a case is quite low. Also, the gap between the dates of hearing extends to several months increasing the pendency of cases.
Thirdly, there is an acute shortage of judges in Indian courts. According to the Press Information Bureau, 2016, there are 464 vacancies of judges in Indian high courts and Supreme Court. India has only 10.5 judges per million of population which is quite a poor ratio, when compared to other countries. The impact of such low ratio is reflected in the choking of India's judicial system with a high number of pending cases and new litigations being filed every day.
When we analyse the above reasons, it can be observed that all the three pillars of Indian state -- Executive, Legislature and Judiciary -- are to be blamed for the persisting plight of Indian judicial system. The legislature with its responsibility of framing laws, the Executive with its task of appointing judges under the present collegium system and the Judiciary with the responsibility of ensuring hassle-free legal proceedings, work in tandem, resulting in the current state of Indian judicial system.
Apart from the courts, there is another important institution of justice ie the law enforcement agency: Police. The role of police in providing justice is equally important vis-à-vis courts of law. Time and again, we read cases in the newspaper, where the police have refused to register an FIR or the charge-sheets filed are ambiguous. The ambiguity of charge-sheets often results in prolonging of cases especially in criminal litigations.
The police force is often accused of being uneducated, corrupt and in the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats. Most modern countries have no intermingling of police with the other parts of the bureaucracy. Local police force reports directly to the local communities that they represent and their relationship with the federal structure is well orchestrated. But India is continuing with the legacy of abusive British colonial rulers who treated Indians like slaves. It is easy to blame the police but they are not to be blamed entirely, they are doing only what they are doing.
Also, the office of public prosecutor is the main link between judiciary and police. In India, there is not enough importance and dignity attached to the offices of public prosecutor. Thus, it's understaffed and lacks a modern infrastructure to execute quality work. Hence, it is essential that we improve and re-structure the complementary institutions to judiciary for speedy trials and for an effective and efficient judicial system.
In the Scandinavian countries, before a person files an appeal in the court of law, he/she has to seek redressal of their grievance through alternate dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms. ADR is an extra-judicial body that resolves grievances through mediation, thus reducing the number of cases filed in the court of law.
In Australia, there is provision for electronic filing of cases, unlike in India, where there is huge amount of paperwork involved. Use of technology in the judicial system can make the entire system much more efficient and aid in speedy trials. Certain countries have adopted 'discovery system' where each litigating party must disclose its evidences to the other party, so that both the parties are able to examine the evidences. This system also reduces the number of cases reaching the court of law.
Every year in India, a law commission is appointed that is endowed with the task of suggesting judicial reforms. Over the years, the commissions have given innumerable suggestions to reform the judicial system such as constituting more number of benches, increasing the judges ratio from 10.5 to 50 judges/million of population, computerising the entire judicial process, bunching of similar cases and conducting their hearing under one bench etc.
My colleague was discussing the article with her mother a 48-year-old, law graduate who is a housewife. Around 30 years back, when she was in law school, she studied the same problems plaguing the Indian judicial system and similar reforms were being suggested. So to change this system, you may not need something radical, but what is required is just the will to change, which is missing. India has now been independent for 68 years; the tears will have to stop and action will be required to change the system we have, because the one we have is not working.
