Gladstone’s famous adage, “Justice delayed is justice denied,” aptly fits in the current law

scenario in India. The backlog of cases pending in lower high courts, and Supreme Court is
mind-boggling.
It is further compounded by miscarriage of justice. Convictions are becoming difficult and less
frequent. We are headed to a society in which as Walter Lippman said, “anything goes.”

Judiciary is one of the four pillars of a democracy. The Executive, the Legislature and the Press
(Fourth Estate) are the other three.

People’s faith in judiciary sustains (or slurs) the judiciary. The latter happens when justice is
either delayed or denied to the people. Or the law operates in two streams: one for .the poor, and
the second for the rich, powerful, influential, and corrupt and politicians. If it is denied, the
judiciary becomes a laughing stock of the country, even of the world!

The latest in (famous) instance pertains to the acquittal of the former Prime Minister, P.V.
Narsihmarao, in the Lakhubai bribery case. It is not the acquittal, which is galling; it is the time
taken by the judiciary to decide the case.

Bofors guns are still spluttering. Evidence recorded shows Hinduja brothers and the Italians
friend of Gandhi family, now comfortably sojourned in South America has since been arrested in
as bribe-takers. Neither has been dished out deserved justice. Tardy justice machinery at the best!

In Gujarat, the intervention of the Apex Court (a blow to the State High Court) saved the
judiciary from a high degree of embarrassment. Obviously, cases transferred to other courts will
entail more delay.

There are many famous (read notorious) cases, which have slurred the judiciary’s name and
reputation. Sukh Ram of Himachal Pradesh, a former Union minister, who had the distinction of
having Rs. 4 crores spread in his bed-sheets, is a free man. To rub salt in wounds, he was, till
recently, a minister in BJP government at the centre.

Punjab Agriculture Minister, Rajinder Kaur Bhathal’s, and Bibi Joginder Kaur’s cases are still
hanging fire. How long will they hang fire is anybody’s guess.
Justice in India has reached a stage where it fits the words of French writer Voltaire, “I never
was ruined but twice – once when I gained a law-suit, and once when I lost one.”

Why this scathing indictment? The reason is obvious. In the habits of legal men every accusation
appears insufficient if they do not exaggerate it even to calumny. It is thus that justice itself loses
it sanctity and its respect among men.

When the former Prime Minister, Narsihmarao, was acquitted in St. Kitts forgery case, and JMM
bribery case, sanctity of justice delayed, became mud.

In Jessica murder case, eye witnesses turned “hostile”. The prosecution cases come crashing
down as the main alleged accused goes scot-free because no one has seen him shooting the
model. But wait. Where is the girl gone? She has been killed. The world knows it. Who has
killed her? The world knows it. But where is justice? No one knows it!

A judge in Mumbai was caught red-handed taking a bribe. The age of the ex-Chief Justice of the
country generated an unpleasant controversy. The one time law minister has leveled charges
against the CJ. One journal from Delhi carried a survey and found out that most people hold the
judiciary of the country in low esteem. The judiciary felt offended. The journal apologized. Does
it speed up justice?

Politicians on the prowl, courtesy lazy judiciary, are legion. The “stars” include Laloo Prasad
Yadav. The classic example of hedge eating the grass. The litany is long and sickening. It is
difficult to find examples of criminals having been convicted. A woman of Punjab accused of
murdering her own husband is “free”.

The tardy disposal of cases in our courts is bringing the truism true that justice delayed is justice
denied. If the machinery of law does not start operating fast enough, the litigants might follow
the path of violence, as several segments of society have already done, as a protest against the
slow redressal of their grievances. Revolts by inmates of Bihar and U.P. prisons are pointers.

Even a casual survey of the number of pending cases reveals how dismal the picture is. More
than 6 lakh cases are awaiting disposal in high courts alone. In 1949, their number was about
60,000.

The question that baffles the common man is: why this delay? Everybody, perhaps except the
legal profession, is worried about the miscarriage of justice through

The most significant cause has been the virtual explosion of legislation in the country since
Independence. The East India Company ruled this country with 43 regulations. Today we have
43 volumes of 3,000 pages each containing the laws of India! Various legislatures in the country
have been churning out laws at a feverish pace. Multitudes of laws, like multitude of physicians,
show that the society is sick. In the same measure, their execution becomes difficult because of
conflict.

This situation gets all the more aggravated as most of these laws are hastily conceived and still
more hastily passed. The increasing controls have added their owns share of aggravation. The
government departments have filed thousands of cases in courts against other department.

Why those way senior officers, some of them as senior as high court judges cannot sit down and
thrash out the issue. Thus saving courts their valuable time for the public.
The hastily conceived and passed laws naturally leave numerous loopholes that enable the evil to
circumvent the law. This increases congestion in courts.

The administration of the constitutional law poses another big hurdle against speedy disposal of
cases. The interpretation of the constitutional law is not a trivial matter.

It needs serious study as the judgments affect the Fundamental Rights of the citizen. It has far-
reaching consequences. Understandably, other cases have to be relegated to the background.
They form the backlog of arrears. When justice is delayed, tyranny begins.

Not less responsible factor is the number of appeals that a litigant is allowed to file against the
judgments of the lower courts. Litigants get dates, not justice.

Accumulation also results from cumbersome procedures. When a case is brought to a high court
or the Supreme Court, the entire record is summoned to the higher court.

This is translated: its copies are prepared and then brought to the rostrum. This naturally takes a
lot of time. This is further complicated as there is too much emphasis on the written record.

Various steps taken to relieve the congestion in courts will be of little avail unless there is some
restraint on the hectic activity of legislating. This is necessary as the population explosion
coupled with law explosion is threatening to paralyze the administration of justice. Laws
multiply when the State is corrupt!
Too many appeals will have to go. As per the present procedure, if a case has to go to the highest
court from the lowest court, it might take even the life span of the litigants for its culmination.
There are thousands in jails awaiting trial.

People who want to stall the operation of law should not be easily allowed to do so. Many cases
are brought forward to get an injunction or stay. That is why there are so many adjournments,
which ought not to be allowed. Every accused gets a pain in the chest. Law is a silent spectator.

Sometimes the lawyers, and sometimes the litigating parties, express inability to attend the court.
Such delaying tactics must be cut to the minimum. Petty-fogging in law, as quackery in
medicine, will continue to flourish so long as laws are riddled with loopholes.

In fact, if the emphasis on the written word or evidence is brought down to the barest minimum,
it can smoothen and hasten course of justice. The example of the United States can be followed
profitably.

The litigants are asked to submit their arguments in writing to the court. The judge makes a
thorough study and gives judgment. This reduces the time wasted in hearing. Moreover written
statements commit the litigants to a particular stand avoiding frivolous talking and retreating.

It will be profitable to have special tribunals where the litigating parties can be made to see
reason before the case goes for a trial. The tribunal, consisting of trustworthy and competent
lawyers or judges, should make the litigants see the futility of going to the court. An outside the
court settlement should be striven for.
In this age of specialization, let there be special tribunals for different kinds of cases. For
example, let the cases of thefts go to one tribunal, cases of tax evasion to another and so on. For
the speedy disposal of cases, these tribunals should be vested with wide powers.

The practice prevalent in Japan could be studied with profit. Cases are disposed of in a day there.
In most cases where no vital aspects of the law are involved, no written evidence is recorded.

The judgment is pronounced immediately after the hearing of both sides. The procedural
cumbersomeness can be done away with in small and trivial cases.

The Union Law Minister announced that 1738 fast track Courts would be set up all over the
country to clear arrears piled up in Courts. So far only about 500 such Courts have been set up.

Lok Adalats, proposed in Punjab, are yet to come to their prime. Names of seven judges though
have gone for approval. There is much talk about increasing the number of judges. While this
will help, it is more important to improve their quality.