CITIZENS’ APPEAL: ENSURING EXPEDITIOUS AND

TIMELY JUSTICE TO ALL

TEAM: A1 NYAYA SHAKTI

Animesh Kumar, Dev Diwakar Patel, Dharmendra Panwar, Harshit Chandra and Madan Singh (Students, Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar)

ENSURING ACCESS TO JUSTICE

Lack of Infrastructure

and Manpower

Unregulated Adjournment

s

Attitude of Lawyers and work culture in

Courts

Endless Amendmen

t of Laws

Issuance of Summons

FACTS AND FIGURES REASONS FOR BACKLOG

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE, MANPOWER AND

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE ARE MAJOR SOURCE FOR INCREASE IN THE

BACKLOG OF CASES IN INDIA

Facts and Figures

Judicial system has been granted fund of o.4% of the India’s GDP

and 13th Finance Commission has allocated Rs. 5,000 Crore for

improvement in judicial delivery system

Ratio of Judges per million people (In 1999 Law Commission India

in 120th Report) - 11 judges (Supreme Court instructed to increase

ration to 50 judges within 5 years in 2002)

The present position – 16 judges per million people in India

(Source: MCMS)

Increase predicted:

- 75,000 judges

- 37,000 judges and ratio from 16 to 30 judges per million people

(in next 3 years)

- Number of Courts to be increased from 14,000 to 18,847

Judicial Development and Recognition

Hussainara Khatoon v State of

Bihar, (1980) 1 SCC 81

Right to Speedy Trial is implicit

in Art 21 of the Constitution of

India

Hussainara Khatoon (II) V Home

Secretary, (1980) 1 SCC 91.

the Court emphasized expeditious

review for withdrawal of cases

against under trails held for more

than two years.

Hussainara

Khatoon (III) v

Home

Secretary,

(1980) 1 SCC

93

Protective

custody was held

to be a blatant

violation of art. 21

Hussainara Khatoon (IV) v. Home

Secretary, (1980)1 SCC 98

The Court emphasized the right

as an essential ingredient of art.

21, which could not be denied on

the ground of financial or

administrative inability of the

state.

Hussainara Khatoon (V) v.

Home Secretary, (1980) 1 SCC

108

It was held that those changed

with multiple offences and

already imprisoned for period

longer than the total maximum

period, if the sentences were to

run consecutively, were also

held entitled to be released.

Nimeon Sangma v. Home Secretary, Govt. Of

Meghalaya, (1980) 1 SCC 700

The expeditious trial and the investigation

were reemphasized by Justice Krishna lyer

Kadra Pahadiya (I) v. State

of Bihar,

The Court complained that

right to speedy trial had

remained a paper promise

Kadra Pahhdiya (II) v. State of Bihar,

AIR 1982 SC 1167

Supreme Court has the power to give

necessary directions to the state

Government and appropriate

authorities for securing this right to

the accused.

Sheela Barse v. UOI, (1986) 3SCC

632.

The effect of the violation of the

right to speedy trial was that the

prosecution itself was liable to be

quashed

S.C. Advocates on Record

Association v. UOI , AIR 1994 SC

268

The Court pointed out that it

may issue direction to assess the

felt need and fix the strength of

judges according to the need.

Santosh Dev. Archana

Guha, AIR 1994 SC 1229

The Court asserted its

power to quash

proceedings for denial of

the right.

S Rama Krishna v S Rami Reddy,

AIR 2008 SC 2066

The Supreme Court has reiterated

that the speedy trial is a

fundamental right of an accused.

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT AND THESTANCE OF THE LAW

COMMISSION

The concept of speedy justice is sine quo non of criminal

jurisprudence. It saves a person from evil consequences of

incarceration. In past, a number of Committees have been set

up to achieve the target of speedy justice.

As back as 1924, Rankin Committee 1924 was

set up on delay in civil cases in High Courts and

subordinate Courts. In 1949, a High Court

Arrears Committee under the chairmanship

of Justice S.R. Das was appointed.

In 1969 Hidayatullah, CJ, presided over

a committee to look into the problem

of arrears in all its aspects. Later on,

Justice Shah was appointed the

Chairman of the Committee. The

Committee was known as High Courts

Arrears Committee, 1972.

Some states also set up committees to look into the problem.

For example, the W.B. Committee, 1949 under the

Chairmanship of Sir J. Harris then Chief Justice of the

Calcutta High Court and the Uttar Pradesh Committee, 1950

under the Chairmanship of Justice Wanchoo

LCI REPORT RECOMMENDATION

19th Law Commission Report It proposed the creation of additional courts and benches to expedite justice

58th Law Commission Report The Commission took note of imperative need to reduce load in the higher

Courts.

77th Law Commission Report Long delay in the disposal of cases has resulted in huge arrears and a heavy

backlog of pending file in various courts in the country. No reform may prove

useful if the existing courts remained burdened with heavy backlog of

pending cases.

79th Law Commission Report The Commission concluded that search for solution is to be regarded as

quest and periodical redefinition of methods is necessary. It further

emphasised the need for speedy implementation of many reports dealing

with the problem of delay and heavy backlog of arrears

120th Law Commission Report Backlogging is a product of Inadequate judge-population ratio and lack of

infrastructure. Manpower Planning in Judiciary in which it compared

India’s judge-population ratio vis-à-vis developed countries and found that

the ratio in India is 10.5 judges per million people (lowest in the world) as

compared to 41.6 per million people in Australia, 75.2 per million people in

Canada, 50.9 per million people in United Kingdom and 107 per million

people in United States of America. The Central (Government) has failed in

its objective to extend the judge strength to 107 judges per million people

by the year 2000 as recommended by the Law Commission of India.

Supreme Court of India in All India Judges Association & ors. V. Union of

India & Ors. has observed that judge strength should be increased by 10

per million people every year for 5 years to meet at least the desired ratio of

50 to a million people.

221st Law Commission Report

230th Law Commission Report

The Commission suggested that Section 80 and Order V of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908 should be amended. It also suggested for the

amendment of Section 378, 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973.

The Government of India should direct the state authorities to set up Fast

Track Courts in the country, which alone can solve the perennial problem

of the pendency of cases.

Section 260 The offences punishable with imprisonment not exceeding two years are

triable summarily.

Section 173

Report of the police officer on completion of the investigation

Section 309

Power to postpone or adjourn proceedings

Section 157 of Cr.P.C

Procedure of Investigation

Section 167 of Cr.P.C

Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours

Section 468

Section 468Bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 AND SPEEDY TRIAL

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEUDRE, 1908 AND SPEEDY TRIAL

SECTION 89 AMENDMENTS BROUGHT BY

1976 AMENDMENT ACT

Recommendation of 13th Finance

Commission, Grant Guidelines,

2011

I. Establishing ADR centers training of mediators/conciliators

II. Establishment of Lok Adalats

III. Training of Judicial Officers

IV. Training of Public Prosecutors

V. Legal Aid

VI. Creation of post of Court Managers

VII. Enactment of National Litigation Policy by the Central Government

Recommendations Legislative amendments suggested:

India, there must be a ‘The Speedy Trial Act’ like in United States Of

America

Incorporating the concept of ‘Plea Bargaining’ in Criminal Procedure

Code, 1973

Amendment of Section 80 and Order V of CPC

To follow the guideline regardign the time in delivery of judgment provided

by Supreme Court in the case of Anil Rai vs. State of Bihar, (2001) 7 SCC

318

The number of adjournments that is to be allowed should be fixed by law

for all kinds of cases.

Infrastructural Recommendations:

Introduction of the Information Technology in the Judicial Proceedings

Audio recording of the Judicial Proceedings should be allowed instead of

court reporters/stenos.

Video conferencing should be allowed in the judicial proceedings in the

matter of the production of the under trials.

Computerization of the documents.

Recommendation for Present Judicial System

Appointment of adequate number of judges or increase in the number of judges in lower and higher judiciary

Establishment of Fast Track Courts at the Magisterial Level

Establishment of the Evening Courts and Mobile Courts

Mechanism for enforcement of any Time Limit for the Delivery of Judgment

Establishment of Specialized Benches

Strengthening the Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism by increasing awareness about it

The number of Public Prosecutors should be adequate and only competent and qualified persons should be appointed as the PPs.

References

Policy and action plan released by National Court Management System, 2012

Colin Gonsalves, When India had 1,500 Fast Track Courts, the Hindu, 11 January

2013

Minsitry of Justice, Department of Justice (website: http://doj.gov.in)

Blue Print for Reducing the Backlog of Cases in the Subordinate Courts of the

State of Gujarat, Research Report, Gujarat National Law University, March 2010.

Reports of the Law Commission of India

Improving Justice Delivery, Ready Reckoner on Thirteenth Finance Commission

Grant, Government Orders and Guidelines Issued by the Government of India,

Government of India, May 2011

Ahmad Siddique, Criminology, Problems and Perspective, 4th Edn., 1997

D.P Sharma, Speedy Justice & Indian Criminal Justice System, XLV(1999) IJPA 365.