Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Ray of hope
There is always a ray of hope..as they say..day follows night..sunshine follows sunset..autumn follows winter n vice versa..we just have to be patient..when life seems to be revolving around murphy's law..one should still keep on working sincerely..pray to God..n have ardent belief in almighty..coz there is always a ray of hope!!..there is always a hope for a new dawn :)
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Mainstreaming and supporting the lowest wing of the Indian Judiciary
Mainstreaming and supporting the lowest wing of the Indian Judiciary
Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.S.Sipurkar, Hon’bleMr.Justice M.R.Calla, Mr.D.K.Garg, Mr.R.S.Goswami, Mr.Ranbir, Sandeep & friends.
I have deepest regards for our judges and the judicial system. I have been practicing for last nine years in Supreme Court & the Delhi High Court. I also appeared several times before the subordinate courts, tribunals and other organs of the judicial system. I see happy, laughing and satisfied litigants and I have also seen annoyed, tense and crying litigants. Delay in the justice delivery system and the pending cases are the major issue which needs to be resolved by the Government. A few days ago a news channel reported that a case is pending for 185 years in one of the court in West Bengal. On 17th December, 2009 our Humble Law Minister M. Veerappa Moily told parliament that a total of 31,139,022 cases were pending in the courts across the country. The Hon’ble Minister also said since their establishment, the fast track courts have disposed of 2.507 million cases out of 3.101 million cases transferred to them.
Friends, I wish a proper planning is done and the requisite infrastructure is provided to our subordinate courts and the High Court on the pattern of the fast track courts so that every court in the country becomes a fast track court.
Ratio of the plethora of the pending cases and the annoyed litigants is much more as compared to the resolved cases. We all are familiar with the famous dialogue in Hindi movies “Tareekh pe Tareekh, Tareekh pe Tareekh, mili hai toh sirf ek Tareekh.” It’s not a joke, infact it is a serious issue to be considered. No matter how hard our judges and lawyers work, the Indian courts are known more for giving ‘Tariq’ instead of delivering justice among the common man.
I also remember an advertisement which comes on the television sometimes. It’s an ad of a plywood company which has a scene of the court in it. The beginning of the ad shows two young lawyers arguing a case. One of them says “Muzrim Jeevandas to kadi sei kadi saza milni chaiye”.The case keeps getting adjourned. The ad ends with two aged lawyers (same people who played young).The accused Jeevandas too has become an old man. The case again gets adjourned. The theme of the ad is that their plywood is timeless and the table top which judge uses is made from their plywood which he uses for hammering while adjourning the case. Their punch line is ‘chalta rahe chalta rahe’.This ad is a satire on Indian Judicial system. Indian judiciary is the last hope of the citizens of India.
Judiciary is one of the most pivotal organs of the Government machinery. In any society the disputes between its individuals are inevitable and an appropriate and effective mechanism for the speedy resolution of those disputes is always required to maintain harmony and peace among the individuals.
The pendency has been on increase which is becoming a cause of concern and the common man, expecting expeditious and inexpensive justice is asking why mills of justice are grinding so slow. I know in one of the cases in Punjab and Haryana High Court more than forty dates were fixed after the writ petition came up for regular hearing and it was decided only when the litigant sat on dharna and the High Court Bar Association stood for his rescue. According to our former Chief Justice of India Shri K.G. Balakrishanan ‘the growing population, increasing awareness of rights and abiding confidence of the people in the judiciary saw a litigation boom which our judicial set up was not sufficiently equipped to handle.” A few days back there was news that the cases filed by the governments are more than those filed by the individuals.
According to legal experts, there are a number of reasons afflicting the Indian judicial system. Underfunding of judiciary, neglect in improving judicial infrastructure over the past decades, inordinate delays in filling up vacancies of judges and very low population-to-judge ratio are some of the major factors that require immediate attention to improve the performance of judiciary.
During the Ninth and Tenth Plan only 0.071percent and 0.078% of the total plan outlays respectively were allocated for the judiciary. It has been observed that such meager allocations are too inadequate to meet the requirements of the judiciary. It is said that India spends just 0.2 percent of the gross national product on judiciary. According to the First National Judicial Pay Commission, every State has been providing less than 1% of the budget for subordinate judiciary except Delhi which has provided 1.03%.However the 13th Finance Commission had approved Rs.5, 000/-crores for states to improve justice delivery.
Another important issue pressing hard is the enhancement of the strength of judges to speed up disposal of arrears in courts. The sanctioned strength of judges of the High Courts was 895 as on 31st December, 2009 but there were 267vacancies. Similarly the sanctioned strength of the Subordinate Judges is 16,880 but there were 2785 vacancies. It is observed that 25 percent of the judicial positions remain vacant due to procedural delays.
Computerisation of courts was initiated in association with the National Informatics Centre (NIC). During the last two decades, the Supreme Court of India, the high courts, city courts, district courts, sub-district courts and fast track courts have witnessed 'informatisation' in their administrative and management process, and have ushered in 'transparency' to the 'common public' to a certain extent. But all these measures have failed to reduce the pending cases.
Our existing laws have provided for the hierarchy of the courts and a case has to be first filed in the court of the lowest jurisdiction. In the civil side the Munsif's Court is the court of the lowest jurisdiction. Then comes the Subordinate Judge's Court (Sub Court), the District Courts, the High Courts and finally the Supreme Court.
Administration of criminal justice is carried out through Magistrate- Courts and Sessions courts.
It’s in the lowest wing of the judiciary that the every factual detail associated with the case, the evidences, the witness and other relates aspects are closely examined. The lowest wing of the judiciary is definitely the eye and ear of the whole judicial body in majority of the cases except where the higher courts have the original jurisdiction. I have seen people giving prime of their life in contesting court cases in the hope for justice. I have also seen many labour matters being decided by the Industrial Disputes Tribunal after 19-20 years and after that the order being challenged by either of the dissatisfied party in the high court. Same is the situation with the civil disputes, rent control matters, motor accident cases, consumer disputes and even matrimonial matters.
There is a dire need to look into the factors causing these delays and hampering the stream of justice. Yes, the lowest wing of the judiciary needs mainstreaming and support. Various steps have been taken in this regard in the last once decade by trying to improve judicial infrastructure in the lower courts and by using the Information technology. However we still have not been able to reduce the formalism in the legal system like the delay in service on the parties, filing of process fee forms etc. again and again which also contributes to delay in various matters. There is constant work pressure on our judges. The strength of the subordinate judiciary has remained static for many years .On an average, the over burdened judge is able to dispose of 1150 cases per year.
The impact and danger of the non formal dispute adjudication structures remains to be acknowledged. While some of the decisions handed down by caste panchayats or informal bodies set up by the armed resistance groups may militate against the accepted sense of justice, these mechanisms are often the only ones available for redress to vast sections of the rural population.
Information on cases disposed of and pending in Gram Nyayalayas (village courts) is not maintained centrally.
Our Hon’ble Law Minister says various steps have been taken to facilitate speedy disposal of cases in courts including increasing the strength of judges in Supreme Court and the High Courts. Other measures include introduction of some legislative measures for improvement in judicial procedure and for expediting disposal of civil and criminal cases in courts.
The Civil Procedure Code and Criminal Procedure Code have been amended and the concept of ‘Plea-Bargaining’ has been introduced. But the burden of reducing the pending cases is yet there in the country.
There are many proposals and suggestion from various corners to improve the system.
I conclude with agreement with the remarks of our Hon’ble Law Minister that ‘Reform cannot be limited to the infrastructural challenge of building more courts, increasing the number of judges, providing computers and solving corporate cases efficiently, It must entail a fundamental transformation of the mindset with which we view each of our roles and responsibilities. Our system of education must identify and cater to various special interests within the professional legal sphere – only then will our needs be matched with the requisite skill set.’
Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.S.Sipurkar, Hon’bleMr.Justice M.R.Calla, Mr.D.K.Garg, Mr.R.S.Goswami, Mr.Ranbir, Sandeep & friends.
I have deepest regards for our judges and the judicial system. I have been practicing for last nine years in Supreme Court & the Delhi High Court. I also appeared several times before the subordinate courts, tribunals and other organs of the judicial system. I see happy, laughing and satisfied litigants and I have also seen annoyed, tense and crying litigants. Delay in the justice delivery system and the pending cases are the major issue which needs to be resolved by the Government. A few days ago a news channel reported that a case is pending for 185 years in one of the court in West Bengal. On 17th December, 2009 our Humble Law Minister M. Veerappa Moily told parliament that a total of 31,139,022 cases were pending in the courts across the country. The Hon’ble Minister also said since their establishment, the fast track courts have disposed of 2.507 million cases out of 3.101 million cases transferred to them.
Friends, I wish a proper planning is done and the requisite infrastructure is provided to our subordinate courts and the High Court on the pattern of the fast track courts so that every court in the country becomes a fast track court.
Ratio of the plethora of the pending cases and the annoyed litigants is much more as compared to the resolved cases. We all are familiar with the famous dialogue in Hindi movies “Tareekh pe Tareekh, Tareekh pe Tareekh, mili hai toh sirf ek Tareekh.” It’s not a joke, infact it is a serious issue to be considered. No matter how hard our judges and lawyers work, the Indian courts are known more for giving ‘Tariq’ instead of delivering justice among the common man.
I also remember an advertisement which comes on the television sometimes. It’s an ad of a plywood company which has a scene of the court in it. The beginning of the ad shows two young lawyers arguing a case. One of them says “Muzrim Jeevandas to kadi sei kadi saza milni chaiye”.The case keeps getting adjourned. The ad ends with two aged lawyers (same people who played young).The accused Jeevandas too has become an old man. The case again gets adjourned. The theme of the ad is that their plywood is timeless and the table top which judge uses is made from their plywood which he uses for hammering while adjourning the case. Their punch line is ‘chalta rahe chalta rahe’.This ad is a satire on Indian Judicial system. Indian judiciary is the last hope of the citizens of India.
Judiciary is one of the most pivotal organs of the Government machinery. In any society the disputes between its individuals are inevitable and an appropriate and effective mechanism for the speedy resolution of those disputes is always required to maintain harmony and peace among the individuals.
The pendency has been on increase which is becoming a cause of concern and the common man, expecting expeditious and inexpensive justice is asking why mills of justice are grinding so slow. I know in one of the cases in Punjab and Haryana High Court more than forty dates were fixed after the writ petition came up for regular hearing and it was decided only when the litigant sat on dharna and the High Court Bar Association stood for his rescue. According to our former Chief Justice of India Shri K.G. Balakrishanan ‘the growing population, increasing awareness of rights and abiding confidence of the people in the judiciary saw a litigation boom which our judicial set up was not sufficiently equipped to handle.” A few days back there was news that the cases filed by the governments are more than those filed by the individuals.
According to legal experts, there are a number of reasons afflicting the Indian judicial system. Underfunding of judiciary, neglect in improving judicial infrastructure over the past decades, inordinate delays in filling up vacancies of judges and very low population-to-judge ratio are some of the major factors that require immediate attention to improve the performance of judiciary.
During the Ninth and Tenth Plan only 0.071percent and 0.078% of the total plan outlays respectively were allocated for the judiciary. It has been observed that such meager allocations are too inadequate to meet the requirements of the judiciary. It is said that India spends just 0.2 percent of the gross national product on judiciary. According to the First National Judicial Pay Commission, every State has been providing less than 1% of the budget for subordinate judiciary except Delhi which has provided 1.03%.However the 13th Finance Commission had approved Rs.5, 000/-crores for states to improve justice delivery.
Another important issue pressing hard is the enhancement of the strength of judges to speed up disposal of arrears in courts. The sanctioned strength of judges of the High Courts was 895 as on 31st December, 2009 but there were 267vacancies. Similarly the sanctioned strength of the Subordinate Judges is 16,880 but there were 2785 vacancies. It is observed that 25 percent of the judicial positions remain vacant due to procedural delays.
Computerisation of courts was initiated in association with the National Informatics Centre (NIC). During the last two decades, the Supreme Court of India, the high courts, city courts, district courts, sub-district courts and fast track courts have witnessed 'informatisation' in their administrative and management process, and have ushered in 'transparency' to the 'common public' to a certain extent. But all these measures have failed to reduce the pending cases.
Our existing laws have provided for the hierarchy of the courts and a case has to be first filed in the court of the lowest jurisdiction. In the civil side the Munsif's Court is the court of the lowest jurisdiction. Then comes the Subordinate Judge's Court (Sub Court), the District Courts, the High Courts and finally the Supreme Court.
Administration of criminal justice is carried out through Magistrate- Courts and Sessions courts.
It’s in the lowest wing of the judiciary that the every factual detail associated with the case, the evidences, the witness and other relates aspects are closely examined. The lowest wing of the judiciary is definitely the eye and ear of the whole judicial body in majority of the cases except where the higher courts have the original jurisdiction. I have seen people giving prime of their life in contesting court cases in the hope for justice. I have also seen many labour matters being decided by the Industrial Disputes Tribunal after 19-20 years and after that the order being challenged by either of the dissatisfied party in the high court. Same is the situation with the civil disputes, rent control matters, motor accident cases, consumer disputes and even matrimonial matters.
There is a dire need to look into the factors causing these delays and hampering the stream of justice. Yes, the lowest wing of the judiciary needs mainstreaming and support. Various steps have been taken in this regard in the last once decade by trying to improve judicial infrastructure in the lower courts and by using the Information technology. However we still have not been able to reduce the formalism in the legal system like the delay in service on the parties, filing of process fee forms etc. again and again which also contributes to delay in various matters. There is constant work pressure on our judges. The strength of the subordinate judiciary has remained static for many years .On an average, the over burdened judge is able to dispose of 1150 cases per year.
The impact and danger of the non formal dispute adjudication structures remains to be acknowledged. While some of the decisions handed down by caste panchayats or informal bodies set up by the armed resistance groups may militate against the accepted sense of justice, these mechanisms are often the only ones available for redress to vast sections of the rural population.
Information on cases disposed of and pending in Gram Nyayalayas (village courts) is not maintained centrally.
Our Hon’ble Law Minister says various steps have been taken to facilitate speedy disposal of cases in courts including increasing the strength of judges in Supreme Court and the High Courts. Other measures include introduction of some legislative measures for improvement in judicial procedure and for expediting disposal of civil and criminal cases in courts.
The Civil Procedure Code and Criminal Procedure Code have been amended and the concept of ‘Plea-Bargaining’ has been introduced. But the burden of reducing the pending cases is yet there in the country.
There are many proposals and suggestion from various corners to improve the system.
I conclude with agreement with the remarks of our Hon’ble Law Minister that ‘Reform cannot be limited to the infrastructural challenge of building more courts, increasing the number of judges, providing computers and solving corporate cases efficiently, It must entail a fundamental transformation of the mindset with which we view each of our roles and responsibilities. Our system of education must identify and cater to various special interests within the professional legal sphere – only then will our needs be matched with the requisite skill set.’
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)