Is Indian Legal System Running Late?

Introduction:

Justice is one of civilization’s central objectives. It is in this manner basic for the legal executive to play out its obligation appropriately for any general public to proceed with its quest for harmony, concordance, and progress. Shockingly, the Indian legal system, in spite of its numerous victories, experiences extreme basic issues that keep it from working appropriately.

In other aspects undoubtedly Indiais developing but its laws are still progressing with the speed of snail which is up to some extent the reason that the total number of pending cases is more than the number of ongoing trials in Indian courts. Obviously, the protocol and legal procedures should be followed with rigidity but not in circumstances where it is unnecessary and meaningless to maintain the bureaucracy that the object to render justice fades away.

Red Tape in Law Requires Upgradation

Nirbhaya Gang Rape Case[1] an incident happened that shook the whole nation. On 16^th December 2012, a 23-year-old paramedic student was brutally raped by six people in Delhi NCR. The victim was assaulted so viciously that she was airlifted with immediate effect to Singapore for medical treatment but fate is not always in favor the girl died on 29^th December 2012 in Mount Elizabeth Hospital, Singapore since then it took seven long years to execute her criminals and shockingly one is set free just because he was minor at the time of the commission of a crime.

In 2005 Laxmi Agarwal Acid Attack Case[2] gained much hike in the press. It was not the first case of its type but fight for justice, in this case, was remarkable. Laxmi had to undergo twelve painful skin surgeries to get her face fixed. The social life of the victim became hell and on the contrary, surprisingly the offender was granted bail for a family function on the security of one lakh rupees. After all how a criminal after committing a heinous crime could be awarded such freedom. Here also the final decision was rendered after four years when the accused was proved guilty previously.

It is quite comprehensible that judicial process takes time to award judgments and in-country with such high crime rate it becomes even more challenging but in cases like these of such barbaric nature where the offender admits his crime in front of a magistrate, there is the requirement of strictness and limitations with respect to freedom of criminal and rapidness in the execution of punishments.

On 26^th November 2008 in Mumbai Terrorist Attack[3] where 166 people died and 300 were reported to be injured. An incident that affected the ages of many families, an attack whose memory still brings goosebumps even after 13 years of tragedy. On 20^th February 2009, Ajmal Kasab made confession before the magistrate and ironically, and he was hanged after four years of attack on 21^st November 2012.

Holding the judiciary system exclusively responsible for such would not be correct. The legislature and executive are also responsible equally.

In very famous Arushi Double Murder Case[4] the police in charge at the crime scene was so negligent in the investigation that he did not inform the forensic team to collect the prime evidence (the fingerprint of the murderer) which could have made it an open and shut case but unfortunately this blunder led the case for several years.

Conclusion

Be it the lawmakers, law executors, or law interpreter, somewhere up to some extent all three have to cope up and need transformations and it is not a very tedious task if the state firmly decides it to do.

There have been various cases when in a single day our law handlers have created history. Constitutional Amendment Bill 2019 and the new status of Jammu and Kashmir would be the perfect example to quote in this context. In the history of India, Constitutional Amendment Bill 2019 was the fastest passed bill in the legislature and President’s order to abrogate Article 35A a constitution of Jammu and Kashmir which was one of the most sensitive issues concerning our ever disputed region Kashmir since 1947. It sounds fictitious but if in reality, our leaders act with the same spirit and attitude towards the flaws and drawbacks of our law machinery then in no time our state will set examples for the rest of the world.

References:

[1] Mukesh v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2017) 6 SCC 1

[2] Naeem Khan @ Guddu v. State on 7^th October 2013

[3] Md. Ajmal Md. Amir Kasab @Abu Muhajid v. State of Maharashtra (2012) 8 SCR 295

[4] State of U.P. through the CBI v. Rjesh Talwar and Another 2008 SCR 3