Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

All the 4 convicts of Nirbhaya Rape Case were hanged on the 20^th March at 05:30 AM (IST).

It seemed like Justice has been served to the Nirbhaya, but is it really the true justice? True justice is something which is meant to be handled at the present moment, but in this case the Justice has been served 7 years 3 months and 4 days or, 2651 days later.

Nobody could understand the frustration which was dealt by the family members during the trial period, waiting, waiting and just waiting for the justice to be served. Why the judiciary took so much time for the justice to be served? There are many possible reasons for this delay, as indicated by the experts. These reasons will be discussed later in the article.

But first of all, Justice is one of civilisation’s foundational Right. Securing justice – social, economic and political – to all citizens is one of the key mandates of the Indian Constitution. This has been explicitly made so in the Article 39-A of the Constitution that directs the State “to secure equal justice and free legal aid for the citizens”.

Problem:

The experiences of last 62 years show that the State has failed squarely on addressing some very basic issues – quick and inexpensive justice and protecting the rights of poor and the vulnerable. The justice delivery system is on the verge of collapse with more and more cases clogging the system. There are cases that take so much of time that even a generation is too short to get any type of redressal.

It is therefore imperative for the judiciary to perform its duty properly for any society to continue its pursuit of peace, harmony and progress. Unfortunately, the Indian judiciary, despite its many successes, suffers from severe structural problems that prevent it from functioning properly. The judiciary’s travails, specifically those relating to delays and backlog are well documented and don’t need repetition. However, it is only in the last few years that these structural problems have been better understood empirically thanks to the availability of better data.

There are many problems prevailing the Indian Judiciary system which are delaying the verdict of the cases. Some of the causes and the possible solutions are listed below (these causes and solutions, suggested by experts, are taken and compiled from various sources):

Causes of Huge Pendency in Court:

1. LESS NUMBER OF JUDGES: The most noticeable purpose behind the pendency of cases is the deficient portrayal of judges in the Indian Judiciary. The number of judges is not as much as required. With an officially low extent of judges in various cases, the Indian legal is deficient with regards to the base fundamental necessity of judge’s numbers.


2. POOR ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM: Another reason for the pendency of cases in Indian courts is the ascent in abuse of law.


3. FILING OF FALSE CASES: Another huge reason behind the pendency of cases in Indian courts is recording false cases with malafide plan for making pointless inconveniences others. At that point now and again there are circumstances when advises endeavor to play their card, they either ask for giving further date by giving different reasons or they are absent with the goal that they get next date for hearing because of which there is superfluous deferral in the event that procedure. Counsels try to extract more time for preparation of cases.


4. POOR INFRASTRUCTURE OF SUBORDINATE COURTS: This is the age of technology, today even the smallest office in the private sector is well equipped with computers and other electronic gadgets, which help them to raise their efficiency and update their records. But our Judiciary has not been provided with the technical assistance of faxes, dicto-phones and other such devices. Almost all the courts have heaps of rotten files in the basement. Thus, though we are living in the age of computers, yet our methodologies are outdated and urgently need a re-look.


5. EXCESSIVE CROSS-EXAMINATION: The issue of over the top and pointless interrogation is likewise extremely pertinent to talk about in shortening the deferral.


6. ABUSE OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: Now a-days, courts are over-overflowed with trivial PILs. Paltry PIL isn't associated with the general population intrigue. Be that as it may, under the pretense of PIL, solicitor needs to serve his own intentions and thus it causes delay in choosing numerous vital cases.


7. NON-COMPLIANCE OF PROVISIONS UNDER CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - 1973: The Code provides certain provisions for settlement of disputes and for speedy trial for instance, compounding of offences, plea bargaining, summary trial etc. But the problem is that this provision is not implemented properly.


8. GREAT NUMBER OF APPEALS: Vast number of requests additionally blocks the expedient transfer of cases. Courts need to invest their valuable energy in transfer of the huge number of claims. Thus, courts can't give their chance in the transfer of other imperative issues.


9. NON-ADHERENCE OF ORDER-X OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE - 1908: Order X CPC manages examination of gatherings by the court. Law Commission of India in its Seventy Seventh Report says that "with a specific end goal to make powerful utilization of arrangements of Order X, it is basic that trial judge should read ahead of time the pleadings of the gatherings and should know the instance of each gathering at exactly that point he can put inquiries and edge issues appropriately." So, resistance of arrangements of Order X drags out the issue.

Solutions to reduce huge pendency in courts:

The following steps could be taken into consideration for reducing pendency in Courts and also for fast justice delivery too-

1. REMOVING REDUNDANT LAWS: It was discovered that outdated and excess laws make disarray among subjects as well as increment pendency of cases, as there are different perspectives from different individuals.


2. PRACTICING LTERNTVE DISPUTE MECHANISM: Suit through the courts and councils set up by the State is one method for settling the question which is an antagonistic strategy for question determination which prompts win-lose circumstance while in Alternative Disputes Resolution what is attempted to be accomplished is win-win circumstance for both the gatherings. There is no one who is failure and the two gatherings feel fulfilled toward the day's end. The ADR systems incorporate assertion, arrangement, intervention and assuagement.


3. FOUNDATION OF FAST-TRACK COURTS: On the proposal of the eleventh Finance Commission, 1734 Fast Track Courts of Sessions Judges were authorized for transfer of old pending cases


4. ESTABLISHMENTS OF LOK ADALATS: Keeping in mind the end goal to accomplish the target revered in Article 39-A of the Constitution of India, the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 was established to give free and equipped legitimate support of the weaker areas of the general public to guarantee that open doors for securing equity are not denied to any resident by reason of monetary or different inabilities. To accomplish that objective, Lok Adalats are being held at different places in the nation and countless are being discarded with lesser expenses.


5. SETTING UP e-COMMITTEE: Extraordinary compared to other methods for viably accomplishing the improvement of the legal parts in the nation was reception of data innovation based frameworks in the legal system to make the legal more successful in giving expedient and opportune equity to the prosecutors.


6. EMERGENCE OF GRAM NYALAYA: It is comprehended that the Ministry of Law and Justice is drawing a Gram Nyayalayas Bill with a goal to secure equity, both common and criminal, at the grass-root level to the residents, which would be the most reduced court of subordinate legal and might give simple access to equity to prosecutor through agreeable strategies, utilization of neighborhood dialect and portable courts wherever vital. In the event that established, such Gram Nyayalayas would truly make equity available and will be reasonable to the normal man at their doorway.


7. ADHERENCE TO PROPER JUDICIAL EDUCATION: Law Commission of India in its Seventy Seventh Report likewise manages a similar issue. Thusly, there ought to be appropriate preparing and training for the judges. Identity of judges assumes a fundamental part in equity conveyance framework. It very important for the judges to have a proper judicial education and should abstain from biasness in the court of law. They should keep in mind the principles of Natural Justice & Audi Alteram Partem also.


8. ENCOURAGEMENT TO PLEA BARGAINING: With the inclusion of new Chapter XXI-A in the Code of Criminal Procedure by Act 2 of 2006, the idea of Plea Bargaining turned into a reality and part of our criminal statute


9. STRENGTHENING OF LEGAL AID SYSTEM: Article 39-A of the Constitution mandates the State to secure that the activity of the lawful framework advances equity based on measure up to circumstance. The State is required to give lawful guide to guarantee that open doors for securing justice are not denied to any native by reason of monetary or other disabilities. The effect of Article 39-A read with Article 21 of the Constitution has been to fortify the privilege of a man engaged with a criminal continuing to lawful guide. The privilege of correspondence before law and equivalent assurance of laws, conceded to our natives, regardless of their social and monetary status will stay fanciful unless and until each resident including the individuals who are from monetarily and socially in reverse classes can have access to the Justice Delivery System by drawing in an effective and equipped Advocate, who can effectively put their case before the Courts and look for equity for them.

Conclusion:

As Martin Luther King once said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." But for a good judiciary it is essential that justice should be impartial, speedy and cheap. Therefore if someone delays something as important as justice knowing that injustice is a threat to it, then the person is denying justice.