Introduction:
The deferral and pendency issues have long been the source of conflict for the Indian Judiciary. Over the last 5 decades, the judiciary, the Ministry of Justice, influential masterminds, and legal advisors have mooted a number of structures to deal with postponement and pendency problems in India. Hon’ble Justice Madan Lokur, Judge, Supreme Court of India had once commented that it would be an impolite stun to determine the pendency of cases. He went ahead to express that it will take over 300 years to clear the excess of crores of cases essentially awaiting move and that as well if no new cases are enrolled in the middle of that period. This is just a reflection of the huge load carried by our Honorable judges and the weight they entail, bearing in mind the ultimate objective of clearing as prudent. It is perceived that India needs legitimate case administration and, moreover, structures for court organization to achieve the goal.
Overview of Huge Pendency in Courts
The latest figures on the pendency of cases across the country at all levels of courts make it clear that more needs to be done to fulfil the mandate of prompt justice. The data, obtained from the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) web portal and the court websites, indicates that little has changed in recent years, although the enormous pendency of cases took centre stage in many negotiations between the judiciary and the government. According to the information made available to the Union Ministry of Law and Justice by the Supreme Court of India, as of December 18, the total number of pending cases in the apex court was 54, 719. For more than 5 years, the number of cases pending in court was 15,929, which is more than 29 per cent of cases. Those who waited more than 10 years for disposal represented 1,550 cases. More than 34.27 lakh cases were pending in high courts, except Allahabad and Jammu & Kashmir High Courts, according to the statistics available on NJDG as of December 26. Data available on the website of the law department of the Uttar Pradesh government showed pending of more than 3.2 lakh. Therefore a total of 37.47 lakh cases are pending in 23 high courts, with an average of around 1.65 lakh each.
Causes of Huge Pendency in Courts
1. Less Number of Judges
The most notable reason behind the pendency of cases is the defective representation of Indian Judicial judges. The amount of judges is not as much a route as is necessary. The underlying motive behind equity cannot be met in the case as we don’t have the judges needed to pick the case.
2. Filling of False Cases
The second enormous aim behind the pendency of cases in Indian courts is to record false cases with malafide intent to make other pointless conveniences. There is documentation of the case, there is a review of the same at that point, and whether evidence is available or the accuracy or intermittency of the same still depends on it, the precious court time is now superfluously squandered.
3. Poor Infrastructure of Subordinate Courts
This is the era of technology, today even the smallest office in the private sector is well equipped with computers and other technical devices to help them improve their records of production and upgrading. But the technical assistance of faxes, dicto-phones, and other such devices, was not provided to our judicial system. In the basement, almost all courts have heaps of rotting documents. One can see courts operating in Circuit Courts without jurisdiction. While we live in the modern era, our methodologies are obsolete, and they need a relook urgently.
4. Excessive Cross Examination
In shortening the deferral, the question of over-the-top and needless questioning is also highly important. In its Seventy Seventh Report, the Law Commission of India argues that “often addresses are put to observers in the round of questioning that is unnecessary, insulting and hassling. It is on such occasions that it becomes important for the trial judge to monitor the proceedings.” Indeed, even the Indian Evidence Act further limits the investigation of repugnant and shameful questions. Furthermore, the Code specifies that the investigation cannot be sought without fairgrounds. Therefore, it may be argued that such needless inquiries squander the court’s precious time and therefore delay equity. Hence, the judge’s position is highly important in regulating such needless questioning.
5. Abuse of Public Interest Litigation
Currently, trivial PILs flood the courts. Paltry PIL is not related to the curiosity of the general population. Be that as it may, the solicitor must represent his own purposes under the pretence of PIL and therefore trigger a delay in the collection of various critical cases. So maybe Bhagwati J. in a historical point judgment of JanataDalv.H.S. Chowdhari cautioned against misuse of PIL With. PIL should not be petitioned for individual and political systems of thought along those lines.
6. Non-compliance of Provisions under Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
The Code provides for some provisions for dispute resolution and for example, timely prosecution, compounding of charges, plea bargaining, summary prosecution etc. But the issue is, this clause is not being fully enforced.
7. Large Number of Appeals
Additionally, a large number of requests obstruct the expedient transfer of cases. Courts need to spend their precious resources in getting the vast number of claims transferred. But, in moving other crucial problems, courts can’t give their chance.
8. Non Adherence of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (Order X)
Order X of the Code of Civil Procedure shall interview orally any person who is able to address any material question concerning the suit, followed by any party appearing in person or present at the Court or by his pleader and conducts court oversight of the gatherings. In its Seventy Seventh Report, the Law Commission of India notes that “with a clear end goal of making powerful use of the arrangements of Order X, it is important that the trial judge should read the pleadings of the meetings in advance and should be informed of the instance of each meeting at precisely that point where he can place inquiries and edge issues appropriately.” So, the resistance of arrangements of Order X drags out the issue.
Solutions to Reduce Huge Pendency inm Courts
The following measures should be taken in order to reduce the delay of the courts and also for the timely delivery of justice.
1. Removing of Redundant Laws
It has been discovered that obsolete and excess laws create disarray between subjects as well as the gradual dependency of cases, as different viewpoints come from different individuals. So it is better to remove the redundant laws.
2. Practicing Alternate Dispute Mechanism
Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 includes the statutory mandate given to the court to refer sub-judice disputes to the various ADR procedures set out therein where it finds it appropriate to do so in order to allow the parties to ultimately resolve their pending cases through well-established methods of resolving disputes other than litigations. Section 89 CPC, therefore, recognised the need and importance of ADR even at the post-litigation level.
Adjustment through the courts and councils set up by the State is one method of settling the issue which is an antagonistic strategy for issue determination which prompts win-lose circumstances, whereas what is attempted to be accomplished in Alternative Disputes Resolution is win-win circumstances for both gatherings. There is no one who is disappointed and by the end of the day, the two parties feel happy. The ADR structures include a declaration, agreement, interference, and assistance. Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure was updated w.e.f. 1-7-2002 with a view to integrating elective systems in the standard.
3. Foundation of Fast-Track Courts
1734 Fast Track Courts of Sessions Judges were allowed to move old pending cases, on the proposal of the 11th Finance Commission. These courts have dismissed 10,99,828 cases out of the 18,92,583 cases. So the fast track courts can solve the pending cases and justice is delivered in time.
4. Establishment of Lok Adalats
Keeping in mind the ultimate aim of achieving the goal revered in Article 39(That citizens, men and women alike, have a right to adequate means of subsistence)of the Constitution of India, the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 was created to grant free and fitted legitimate help to the weaker areas of the general public to ensure that people are not denied to open doors and to secure equity on account of monetary or other incapacities. To achieve that aim, Lok Adalats is held in various locations across the nation and countless are discarded with lower expenses.
5. Setting up E-Commerce
The reception of technology innovation-based frameworks in the legal system to make the legal system more effective in giving expedient and timely equity to the prosecutors was extraordinary compared to other methods for achieving viably the improvement of the legal parts in the country. Data invention was out of the blue introduced in the Indian law by Mr Justice G.C. Bharuka in the year 1991 at the Patna High Court when he was a baby judge of a few months and there was some improvement so long that he remained in Patna, where he remained after it ended. Following the appointment of Mr Justice Bharuka to the Karnataka High Court, it was a mask help for the general population of Karnataka where he himself had done comprehensive work for the presentation of IT in Indian law.
6. Establishment of Gram Nyayalya
It is understood that the Ministry of Law and Justice is drafting a Gram Nyayalayas Bill with the objective of ensuring equality, both common and criminal, for citizens at the grassroots level, which will be the lowest court of subordinate law and could provide the prosecutor with easy access to equality through agreeable tactics, using dialect communities and portable courts where necessary. If it grew, such Gram Nyayalayas would actually make equity accessible and would be equal to the common man at their doorway.
7. Adherence to Proper Judicial Education
India’s Law Commission similarly addresses a similar problem in its Seventy Seventh Survey. And proper planning and training should be provided for the judges. Judge identity plays a central role in the system for equity conveyance. Getting proper judicial education is very necessary for the judges and should abstain from biasing in the court of law. They should also be aware of the ideals of Natural Justice & Audi Alteram Partem.
8. Encouragement to Plea Bargaining
With the introduction by Act 2 of 2006 of a new Chapter XXI in the Code of Criminal Procedure, the concept of Plea Bargaining became a fact and part of our criminal law. The supplication bartering act is widespread in Western nations, especially the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. When issuing summons to a defendant, he may be informed on the arrangements for the bartering of petitions found in Chapter XXI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The move may diminish the huge accumulation of cases in our courts, assuming an increasingly charged approach and dealing with the supplication. Separate appeal for bartering, if the list of compoundable offences is extended and more crimes are added into it and made compoundable, it would also help to make a mark on the mounting debts overdue and the court’s sparing time.
9. Strengthening Legal Aid Systems
- Section 304 of the Criminal Procedure code, Is a provision providing, in certain cases, for legal aid to the accused at the State cost. Pursuant to Section 304, the Bombay High Court of Judicature made certain laws concerning legal assistance to accused without representation before Sessions Courts.
Article 39A of the Constitution of India provides for free legal assistance to the poorer and weaker sections of society and ensures justice for all and provides for the State to ensure that the functioning of the legal system promotes justice on the basis of measuring up to the circumstances. The State is expected to provide legal guidelines to ensure that any indigenous individual is not denied open doors to ensure justice on account of monetary or other disabilities. The purpose of reading Article 39A with Article 21(Protection of life and personal liberty., No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law)of the Constitution was to enhance the right of a man with a convict who continues to be a legal guide. In this way, this article was used to decode the right given by the Criminal Procedure Code, Section 304. The right of communication before the law and the equal guarantee of laws given to our citizens, irrespective of their social and monetary status, will remain fanciful unless and until each person, including individuals from the monetary and social context, can have access to the Justice Delivery System by employing an efficient and trained Advocate who can effectively do so.
Landmark Cases for Speedy Trial for Justice
There are some driving case laws for the intent of a swift trial. Investigating these case laws is important for understanding the creation of rapid trial law-:
- Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar- In this case, the number of detainees under trial who were in prisons in Bihar territory for a significant period of time in anticipation of their trial was reported in an appeal for habeas corpus. Bhagwati held that “the right to a speedy trial is a major right that is guaranteed under Art.21 of the Constitution.” Accordingly, the Apex Court ordered the Bihar Government to discharge the detainees under trial on their own bonds.
- State of Maharashtra v. Champa Lal– Court held that “if the accused himself was responsible for the postponement, he could not manipulate it. A postponed trial was not really an uncalled trial. If the accused had been partial in directing his guard, it could be argued that the accused had been denied the right and that the conviction would certainly have to go.
- Ranjan Dwivedi vs CBI– In this case, the court upheld a similar view that the right to a speedy trial is essential. The Court held that “a fairly swift trial is a critical and fundamental piece of the fundamental proper to life and freedom under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Conclusion
Decisions which were slowly delayed or analyzed seldom achieve their function. They are the real obstacles to a State or country’s development.
The litany of woes triggered by a pause in the administration of justice is distasteful. A layman doesn’t want to hear any justification for the delay in implementing justice, he needs and knows he has the right to get justice and that’s also within a fair time frame.
Delayed justice is the main cause of the country’s prevalent corruption. Many political leaders enjoy ministerial chairs while many lawsuits are pending against them.
Social justice will only be possible if the whole idea of a democratic state, social order, where no one is oppressed, is pursued; every person is liberated and free from hunger and poverty.
Over the last few decades, the relentless growth of the repression in courts and councils around the world has caused indignation. The population and the synchronous increase in consciousness of legal rights among people have resulted in an increasing court pendency.
Since “justice delayed is justice denied” and “justice rushed is buried justice” is equally true. Therefore, a reasonable, logical and equal hearing for all cases is the necessary condition of fair justice and balance of convenience. Law is an exceptional achievement which requires tremendous respect.
References:
- www.latestlaws.com
- www.legalserviceindia.com
- Civil procedure code,1908
- Criminal procedure code,1973
- www.indiankanoon.com
0 Comments