Innovative Ways-Judicial Reforms

'The Judiciary was to be an arm of the social revolution upholding the equality that Indians had longed for'.

In India from times immemorial Judiciary have been held in highest esteem and revered as super humans. A Judiciary manned by Judges with vision, wisdom and compassion can do more justice and the welfare of the underprivileged, than all the laws and polices we can think of. In its Composition, the Judiciary must reflect the intellectual and social composition of civil society, its diversity and pluralism. Enormous responsibility, therefore, rests on the higher Judiciary for Judicial appointment, which under the present dispensation, almost exclusively with the Judiciary. There is an increasing focus on the issues of accountability of all organs of the States. Judiciary is no exception to this challenge.

A mechanism for accountability, conceived and implemented by the Judiciary itself, is the surest way to ensure judicial independence. An independent judiciary responding to the needs of our society goes a long way in strengthening democracy in our country.

Judicial Reforms is a vast and complex topic. It embraces legislative reforms, reforms of the judicial system and most importantly and on a more general level, reforming the administration of justice. That reforms are required urgently is not in doubt.

The ground reality is that there are more than 46,000 cases pending in Supreme Court of India, more than 36 Lakhs cases pending in the High Courts and more than 2.5 Crores cases pending in subordinate courts. A large number of cases are also pending in tribunals, quasi-judicial bodies etc. President Pratibha Patil on July 31st, 2010 called upon the State governments, the Bar and the Bench to find innovative methods to liquidate backlogs of cases in courts in a time-bound manner. 

Our Judiciary is respected in India as well as abroad for its contribution in protecting citizens from arbitrary exercise of power and evolving purposive interpretation and legal tools to render justice even to those who cannot approach the courts. Our Bar is second to none in the world. We are fortunate to have a vibrant democracy, independent judiciary, a competent bar, independent media, independent election commission and vigilant voters and the Rule of Law pervading all our institutions. Thus we have all the basic pillars to make the delivery of high quality justice, speedy and affordable. Even so, changes are required at all levels and from all constituents. Something has to be done by the Legislatures, the Executive, the Bar and the Bench, Bar Councils, Bar Associations, law teachers, law students, paralegals and also the civil society. Inaugurating the two-day all-India seminar on judicial reforms, organised by the Confederation of Indian Bar (CIB), the President pointed out that government agencies being one of the biggest litigants must exercise restraint from routinely instituting litigation and clogging the system.

The justice delivery system has been afflicted by an explosion of litigation. Current figures reveal that the arrears in High Courts exceed 40 lakh cases, while in the subordinate Courts, it surpasses 270 lakh. Delays render the common man’s knock on the temple of justice a frustrating experience. Litigants are not able to lead normal lives being unsure of the verdict in their case. In criminal cases, delays compel undertrials to suffer imprisonment for an agonisingly longer time than what the law prescribes.

It is paradoxical that alongside docket explosion, we have the phenomena of docket exclusion. Litigation being expensive, approaching courts without legal aid is a daunting task for the poor and the vulnerable.

Congestion of court cases has been compounded by shortage of judicial manpower and low judge-to-population ratio. We must explore betterment of this ratio, by augmenting the strength of the judiciary without compromising on quality. There is a need to act fast on other parameters. Advance action needs to be taken to fill up existing and prospective vacancies. Delay in the process of judicial appointments should be avoided in the face of the huge swell in the volume of litigation. It is said that while a litigant has one life, litigation transcends generations.

Towards curtailing wastage of precious judicial time, we must re-engineer and simplify court procedures, which otherwise tend to make litigation unduly slow and protracted. Frequent demands and liberal grant of adjournments, filing of multiple suits and similar tactics make judicial productivity sluggish. Timely pronouncement of judgments and quick execution of decrees would be beneficial.

 

Alternative mechanism:

Alternative Dispute Resolution, including arbitration, conciliation, negotiation and mediation could decrease the cost and time of litigation, improve access to justice and preserve social relationships.  Judicial accountability and judicial independence should coexist harmoniously. There can be informed discussion on ways and means of ensuring judicial accountability. The common man holds the judiciary in exalted trust and reposes deep faith and confidence in it. Our judiciary has won international encomium for its unique jurisprudential contributions. It is therefore the sacred responsibility of every citizen, every judge and every lawyer to the country, that the lustre of judicial portals is not diminished, its pious reputation not tarnished and that judiciary as the bulwark of freedom, grows from strength to strength.

 

Statistical experts to crack arrears

Maintaining that there was a distinction between pendency and arrears of cases, Chief Justice of India S.H. Kapadia on July 31, 2010 indicated that he would soon appoint statistical experts to analyse different aspects of arrears so that a solution could be found. Presiding over the national seminar on judicial reforms organized  by the Confederation of Indian Bar, Justice Kapadia said The arrears of cases must be understood in the true sense. He asserted that the current figure of three crore cases pending in various courts could not be considered arrears. Pointing out that 62 per cent of the cases were only one year old, he said “There is a distinction between pendency and arrears . The CJI said a special team of statistical officers would segregate cases on three fronts by classifying them as 'sticky cases', 'œsubverted cases' and 'process problem cases'.

- He called for use of modern technology to overcome the problems arising out of 'process delay'

- Sticky cases were those which consumed considerable time, while subverted cases would be identified as those in which one of the parties tried to delay the proceedings and in the last category the delay occurred because of delay in issuing notice, etc. The CJI called for legislative, judicial and bar reforms saying that judicial reforms alone would not work. You can’t have a chariot running on one wheel.

 

Conclusion:

One of the reasons for delay in disposal was the lack of settlement culture in the country is not having the specialist mediators to settle cases. There has been a high GDP growth in the country, but the gap between the rich and the poor has also increased. The Government has to take steps to bring down the gap and more implementive initiatives.

  The Author is V.G.Ranganath working as an Assistant Professor, Padala Rama Reddi Law College, Hyderabad and Research Scholar(part-time), Dr.B.R.Ambedkar College of Law, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam.   1 Nyayadeep, Vol.V, Issue.1, Oct, 2004, P.19<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]--> J. Venkatesan “President calls for innovative methods to liquidate arrearsâ€� , The Hindu, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article544676.ece (Last Visited on August 1, 2010). President Spoke in the National Seminar organized by Conferation of Indian Bar. 

<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]-->See  http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article544714.ece (Last Visited on August 1, 2010).

 

All form fields are required.

Name Write a Review