Judicial Reforms

[op-ed snap] Instant injustice

Note4Students

From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :

Prelims level : Not much.

Mains level : Judiciary, women’s safety.

Context:

Encounters, like the one in Telangana, call attention to a criminal justice system in need of urgent reform.

Question of instant injustice:

  • Following the recent encounter in Telangana, the Uttar Pradesh police announced that in the last 2 years they have killed 103 criminals.
  • Chhattisgarh encounter of June 2012 is an example of innocents being killed in extrajudicial killings.
  • While these examples seem to raise the question of instant justice, they actually raise the question of instant injustice.
  • We need to recognise this dividing line.
  • Our progressive Constitution gives us the rule of law where everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty through a fair trial.

What is wrong with our criminal justice system?

  • Pendency of the cases is the biggest challenge.
  • As per the National Judicial Data Grid, more than 20 lakh criminal cases are pending for more than 10 years in district courts and high courts.
  • As per the National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB) (2017) report, 1.27 lakh cases of rape are pending in the courts at various stages.
  • With 1840 pending for more than 10 years.
  • More than 30,000 cases of rape were registered in 2017 alone.
  • Assuming no dramatic improvement, when will the more than 90 statistically and tragically likely to be raped today see justice?

Utilisation of funds:

  • They say prevention is better than cure, but it is not the case if we look at the fund utilisation.
  • Over the last five years, utilisation of fund released by the Ministry of Home Affairs for the Nirbhaya fund projects is dismal.
  • Overall it is 9 per cent and in the case of Maharashtra, it is 0 per cent.
  • Similarly, funds released by the Ministry of Women and Child Development have been used to the extent of 20 per cent and in Madhya Pradesh, it is 0 per cent.

Way forward:

  • Widening the definition and making punishment more stringent is not the answer. 
  • Procedural changes are required.
  • Infrastructure for the courts must be paid attention to on an urgent basis.
  • Problems of the vacancies of the judges must be addressed.
  • What is essential is a study of the requirements of each court before any realistic solution is proffered.

Conclusion:

While this task will require an enormous effort, it needs to be carried out as a mission mode project in public interest, otherwise, we will continue to witness the sufferings of women followed by the examples of instant injustice.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments