The law's delay is classical and universal. It has served to describe the almost immemorial condition of civil suits. The dockets, or calendars of civil causes, are always overcrowded and it may take years to get a trial on merits. The expenses of commencing a civil action and the legal cost involved are too heavy, and it becomes hardly worthwhile to base an action on a small claim. The procedure is too elaborate and technicalities impede the litigant at every stage. Even after an initial judgement, a member of appeals may be a further cause of delay. Where the final judgement is secured, execution is more than likely to be returned unsatisfied. Under such circumstances the honest litigant is impeded in the assertion of his legal rights, while paradoxically enough the dishonest litigant is encouraged to assert unfounded or exaggerated claims. The very expense of engaging upon a protracted litigation should cause parties to settle for smaller sums or go without redress and justice.
Delay and technicality are operative not in civil actions alone. The condition is not better in the administration of criminal justice. In the pre-democratic era the arbitrary character of criminal justice led to accusations of excessive harshness, while at present the outcry is against an excessive tenderness towards malefactors. Many criminals are never even apprehended. Some have more than an even chance to escape by taking advantage of the loopholes of the law. The inherent drama of a criminal trial in the very nature of things always favours the defence. Except in matrimonial actions and liberal cases a civil trial is usually free of such influence. On the other hand, corruption, favouritism and perjury are especially operative in criminal trials. Every period has its own cause celebre. It is hearsay that wealthy and powerful malefactors escape while the poor and friendless go to jail. Innocent men are sometimes framed by the police; and it is small comfort that the same technique is employed to get professional criminals behind the bars upon fabricated charges.
Justice H R Khanna of the Supreme Court had observed:
Another thing which is shaking the confidence of the people in the judicial system is the high incidence of acquittals and the increasing failure of the system to bring major culprits to book. Judges, of course have to give their verdict on the material on record and no one can and should expect the courts to hold a person guilty unless there be credible evidence to substantiate the charge against him. One major reason for the high percentage of acquittals is the decline in the quality of police investigation and its consequent inability to procure and produce credible evidence as may establish the guilt of the accused. Such decline in its turn has been due to interference by the politicians in the investigation of cases. It is well known that the greater a person is a goonda or an anti-social being the greater is his value and utility at the time of elections. When politicians seek and secure the assistance of anti-social beings at the time of the elections, the latter extend their assistance in the expectation that when those anti-social elements are in trouble at the hands of the law enforcement agencies, the politicians would come to their rescue and take them out of the difficulty. The help rendered by the politicians to the anti-social beings when in difficulty is the quid pro quo for the help given by the anti-social elements at the time of elections. All this naturally makes the task of the police investigation of crimes extremely difficult. This apart, we find that a good bit of the time of the police force is taken in the security and other arrangements for the VIPs. Demonstrations, bandhs, strikes, hartals and agitations have increasingly become a part of our public life and call for considerable attention of the police force. Investigation of crimes occupies comparatively lower priority in the functioning of the police. The result as such is deterioration in the quality of investigation and the increasing inability of the police force to adduce credible evidence at the trial. Be that as it may, whatever may be the reason for the high incidence of acquittals, the inevitable effect of that would necessarily be the loss of confidence of the people in the court to bring the major culprits to book. We have to bear in mind that if the people lose their faith in the judicial system and carry the impression that the judiciary is not able to punish the culprits, the victims and the kinsmen of the victims would resort to extra-legal methods to settle score with the culprits whose identity is normally known to them. It is plain that such a state of affairs would lead to chaotic and anarchical conditions.
Delay and technicality are operative not in civil actions alone. The condition is not better in the administration of criminal justice. In the pre-democratic era the arbitrary character of criminal justice led to accusations of excessive harshness, while at present the outcry is against an excessive tenderness towards malefactors. Many criminals are never even apprehended. Some have more than an even chance to escape by taking advantage of the loopholes of the law. The inherent drama of a criminal trial in the very nature of things always favours the defence. Except in matrimonial actions and liberal cases a civil trial is usually free of such influence. On the other hand, corruption, favouritism and perjury are especially operative in criminal trials. Every period has its own cause celebre. It is hearsay that wealthy and powerful malefactors escape while the poor and friendless go to jail. Innocent men are sometimes framed by the police; and it is small comfort that the same technique is employed to get professional criminals behind the bars upon fabricated charges.
Justice H R Khanna of the Supreme Court had observed:
Another thing which is shaking the confidence of the people in the judicial system is the high incidence of acquittals and the increasing failure of the system to bring major culprits to book. Judges, of course have to give their verdict on the material on record and no one can and should expect the courts to hold a person guilty unless there be credible evidence to substantiate the charge against him. One major reason for the high percentage of acquittals is the decline in the quality of police investigation and its consequent inability to procure and produce credible evidence as may establish the guilt of the accused. Such decline in its turn has been due to interference by the politicians in the investigation of cases. It is well known that the greater a person is a goonda or an anti-social being the greater is his value and utility at the time of elections. When politicians seek and secure the assistance of anti-social beings at the time of the elections, the latter extend their assistance in the expectation that when those anti-social elements are in trouble at the hands of the law enforcement agencies, the politicians would come to their rescue and take them out of the difficulty. The help rendered by the politicians to the anti-social beings when in difficulty is the quid pro quo for the help given by the anti-social elements at the time of elections. All this naturally makes the task of the police investigation of crimes extremely difficult. This apart, we find that a good bit of the time of the police force is taken in the security and other arrangements for the VIPs. Demonstrations, bandhs, strikes, hartals and agitations have increasingly become a part of our public life and call for considerable attention of the police force. Investigation of crimes occupies comparatively lower priority in the functioning of the police. The result as such is deterioration in the quality of investigation and the increasing inability of the police force to adduce credible evidence at the trial. Be that as it may, whatever may be the reason for the high incidence of acquittals, the inevitable effect of that would necessarily be the loss of confidence of the people in the court to bring the major culprits to book. We have to bear in mind that if the people lose their faith in the judicial system and carry the impression that the judiciary is not able to punish the culprits, the victims and the kinsmen of the victims would resort to extra-legal methods to settle score with the culprits whose identity is normally known to them. It is plain that such a state of affairs would lead to chaotic and anarchical conditions.
0 comments: