Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan has hit the nail on the head by urging the government to appoint more judges to deal with 1.8 crore pending cases in the country. The root cause for the delay in disposal of cases in courts is the poor judge to population ratio in India. As he has pointed out, over 400 murder cases are registered in Delhi every year. The Chief Justice's plea for more judges is backed by three judgments of the apex court in 2002 and the 120th report of the Law Commission. It has also summarily dismissed pleas against the establishment of fast track courts. While on the one side justice delayed is justice denied, on the other, justice hurried is justice buried. The 120th Law Commission has recommended a five-fold increase in judicial strength at all levels from 10.5 to 50 judges per million of population, but it is yet to be implemented.
The Malimath Committee has lamented the huge pendency of criminal cases, the inordinate delay in disposal of these cases and the low rate of conviction in cases involving serious crimes. An offshoot is the large number of undertrials mostly underprivileged and from rural backgrounds. No doubt, the Criminal Procedure Code has been amended to set off time spent in prison as an undertrial against eventual sentence. But those acquitted after a prolonged trial, like Abdul Nasser Madani in the Coimbatore serial bomb blast case, have no
remedy.
The third report of the National Police Commission has found that nearly 60 per cent of all arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified. In the US, criminal cases are vetted by the district attorney's office and only those which are prima facie strong are sent to court. Here, the public prosecutor is presented with a fait accompli by the police and more often than not, he has to make the best of a bad bargain. As for civil cases, lok adalats to facilitate out-of-court settlements, now availble for accident claims cases, should be extended to other cases, wherever possible. Written submissions, though allowed, do not serve the purpose of cutting down on long oral arguments. Another reason is that frequent adjournments are given to suit the convenience of senior lawyers. What is needed is a holistic approach to judicial reforms.
