2. PRESENT SCENARIO OF JUSTICE
TODAY THE DECLINE IN THE PRESTIGE AND IMAGE OF THE JUDICIAL
SYSTEM IN INDIA IS A HARSH REALITY.
THE GENERAL IMPRESSION OF THE PEOPLE IS THAT A LARGE
NUMBER OF CASES ARE BEING DELAYED AND, IF ANY CASE IS FILED,
IT WOULD TAKE YEARS TO GET A RELEF.
MORE THAN 4,000 CASES ARE PENDING BEFORE VARIOUS REVENUE
COURTS.
SOME OF THESE CASES HAVE BEEN PENDING FOR MORE THAN 40
YEARS.
1634 CASES PENDING WITH DISTRICT CONSUMER REDRESSAL.
JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS GROANING UNDER THE LOAD OF OVER 3 CRORE
PENDING CASES AT VARIOUS LEVELS AND ITS IMAGE DENTED BY
SPORADIC REPORTS OF CORRUPTION AMONGST JUDGES.
QUOTED FROM THE BOOK SCALING JUSTICE BY SHYALSHRI SHANKAR
HE SAYS SCHOLARLY STUDIES,NEWSPAPER REPORTS AND THE
COURT’S OWN JUDGEMENT GIVE US CONTRADICTORY IMAGES OF A
JUDGE IN INDIA’S SUPREME COURT :ACTIVIST, POLITICAL,
CONFRONTATIONAL, POLICY MAKER, INEFFECTIVE, CORRUPT,
APOLITICAL AND IMPARTIAL. MOST EXPERTS AGREE THAT INDIA’S
SUPREME COURT AND LOWER COURTS’ PRO-ACTIVE BEHAVIOR ON
SOCIAL RIGHTS CAN BE TRACED TO THE IMMEDIATE POST-
EMERGENCY ERA WHEN JUSTICES EVOLVED USER-FRIENDLY
APPROACHES TO THE COURT.
3. HOW COURTS TIME IS WASTED
Reasons
for
adjourning
• AHempKng
compromise.
• Lawyer(s)
not
present.
• Witness(es)
not
present.
• PlainKff/defendant
not
present.
• Lawyer
not
ready.
• Material
not
ready.
• File
not
available.
• Process
not
served/received
back.
• MaHer
with
appellate
court.
• Miscellaneous
applicaKon
filed
(supervening).
• LisKng
error.
• Judge
not
available.
• MaHer
not
reached.
• Sine
die(adjourned
to
no
fixed
date).
• OTHERS
TOTAL
Cases
pending
14
34
39
7
4
20
0
4
0
0
7
14
20
2
8
173
4. DELAY IN JUSTICE
Delay means a something that takes too long to happen but
what is considered too long for some may be acceptable for
others.
In dispute resolution there is often at least one
side within interest in maximizing delay.
It creates inequality in access to justice- those
with deepest pockets are most able to tolerate delay.
It creates incentives for disputance to bypass delay
where private alternatives including corruption.
Chronic delay can convert justice providers into
impeders of justice- institutional blockers of dispute
resolution.
5. Timeliness
standard
for
case
disposal
Supreme
Court
and
High
court
Not
more
than
10%
of
acKve
cases
are
to
exceed
12
months.
Not
more
than
2%
of
acKve
cases
are
to
exceed
24
months
District
Courts
Not
more
than
10%
of
acKve
cases
are
to
exceed
6
months.
Not
more
than
2%
of
cases
are
to
exceed
12
months.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT OF DELAY
• Justice sector agencies typically do casework i.e. they process disputes
or claims of all types case by case.
• The notion of dealing is a common factor in assessing case work
effectiveness. However the general cases affect what may be considered
to be a standard of “unacceptable delay”.
In defining acceptable delay the challenge is to set a standard of delay
that those concerned consider acceptable.
Standards can rightly vary according to the type of court
and adoptive standard needs to be a guideline not mandatory and it will
be useless unless adherence to it is actually measured and published.
7. CAUSES OF DELAY
• Indian courts have large backlogs. For instance, the
DELHI HIGH COURT has a backlog of 466 years according
to its chief justice.
• Large number of vacancies in trial courts.
• Unwillingness of lawyers to become judge.
• Failure of the apex judiciary in filling vacant high court
judges post.
• Corruption has reached the highest judicial forum i.E.
Supreme court of india.
Routine court statistics – Many courts will count new case
registrations monthly(possibly annual counts of active
cases
),but often little else.
Court caseload census- asking court secretaries to count
cases as a one-off exercise
Case file studies- examination of a sampling of court files to
extract numerical information –e.g. age, case type
Daily transaction survey – analysis of what occurs in a
courtroom in terms of the processes of case disposal –e.g.
ratio of disposed to adjourned cases per court day.
Present process of appointment of judges has not proved to
be adequate. Need to relook and revisit the entire justice
system.
8. Reasons:
According to the World Bank, "although India's
courts are notoriously inefficient, they at least
comprise a functioning independent judiciary"[6] A
functioning judiciary is the guarantor of fairness and
a powerful weapon against corruption. But people's
experiences in fall far short of this ideal. Corruption
in the judiciary goes beyond the bribing of judges.
Court personnel are paid off to slow down or speed
up a trial, or to make a complaint go away. Judges are
also subject to pressure from above, with legislators
or the executive using their power to influence the
judiciary, starting with skewed appointment
processes. Citizens are often unaware of their rights,
or resigned, after so many negative experiences, to
their fate before a corrupt court. Court efficiency is
also crucial, as a serious backlog of cases creates
9. • Reform court rules for modern systems of case
management.
• Improve the personal effectiveness of Judges and court staff
through training.
• Give court personal better tools to work with such as
Computer networks and Databases.
• Give judges better technology to use in the court room.
• Build better facilities for courts –refurbish offices and court
rooms.
• Budgetary reforms for courts –increase funds.
• National building and management system for the
administration of justice.atisfactory
• Strengthening of the bar.
• Strengthening of legal education.
• Legislative reform to remove the bottlenecks that are
adversely affecting the adjudication.
• Satisfactory framework for judicial accountability.
• Arbitration court should be setup so that some of the cases
should be settled outside the courts.
10. benches.
• The Bar Council should improve the mechanism and the
license given to the lawyers should be changed.
• As per changing time the lawyers and the judges should
be given more resources such as online databases and
they should be updated to the technology.
• Around 100 crores rupees will be needed for the updation
of our court rooms.
• For this the government should provide assistance and
this is a one- time settlement and this will change the
scenario of the present judicial system.
11. HOW
WILL
WE
IMPLEMENT
OUR
SUGGESTION
• By making national planning and management system for the
Administration of justice.
• By
making
systemaKc
plans
at
the
State
and
NaKonal
levels
to
overcome
the
delays
and
arrears
of
cases.
By making judiciary free from political interference directly.
The people should be made aware about the Lok aadalats arb
