CITIZENS’ APPEAL :- ENSURING EXPEDITIOUS

AND TIMELY JUSTICE

TO ALL

CURRENT SCENARIO

S.No.

Name of Court (INDIA)

Pendency Instituted Disposed

1. Supreme Court 54562 77090 73133

2. High Court 4251041 1947006 1784301

3. Sub-ordinate court 27734599 17996886 18615075

4. Total 32040202 20020982 20472509

MAJOR PROBLEMS

To provide expedite and cost effective justice while

maintaining its quality

Lack of technological

Assistance

Budgetary Allocation(less

than 1%)

Vacancies not being filled

Poor Judicial Management

RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL

• Article 21 under the Indian constitution :- Protection of life and personal liberty- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

• In Sheela Barse & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 August, 1986, it was held that The right to speedy trial is a fundamental right implicit in Art. 21 of the Constitution.

• Objective :- to avoid oppression and prevent delay by imposing on the courts and on the prosecution on obligation to proceed with reasonable dispatch.

BOOSTING INFRASTRUCTURE AND TECHNOLOGICAL

ASSISTANCE IN COURTS

IMPROVING TECHNOLOGICAL ASSISTANCE •Technological upgradation: Audio-video recording, computerization, touch screen kiosks, biometrics for courts,sms based systems etc. •Benefits:Data Management Systems , Improvement in the case flow systems and record management at the subordinate court level, IT changes for trial hearings. •The no. of E-courts should be increased & linkages must be improved.

CURBING FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS •11TH five year plan: Rs.1470 crores allocated(0.07% of the plan outlay) •Required amount: Approx 2% of annual budget. •Objective:Enhancing accountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities. •Utility of funds: Planning,creation,development and maintenance of judicial infrastructure(buildings,libraries,technological assistance) •Measure:Increase annual budget and ensure collaboration between state and central government for allocating funds for judiciary.

REDUCING VACANCIES IN JUDICIARY AND PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL STAFF •No. of vacancies in courts are as follows: Supreme Court-4 , High Courts-273 ,Sub-ordinate courts-3670(Total vacancies-3947) •Measures:Appointment committee for judicial posts for filling up the vacancies and expert assistance for planning judicial budget at HC level. Post of professional accountants need to be created to ensure financial autonomy and audit of accounts. • Benefits:Reduces burden on judiciary

JUDICIAL MANAGEMENT

Case Management :- Fixing reasonable time table. effective use of judicial resources.

Working hours Reduce the no. of holidays.( Current SC- 100, HC-80, Subordinate -60 ) Increase the span of working hours. Introduce shift systems.

Judicial officers Public Relation Officers must be appointed. Regional Court Management Authority should be set up which would coordinate with court managers. Judicial staff must be trained .

ESTABLISHMENT OF ADDITIONAL COURTS

FAST TRACK COURTS •11th finance commission -Rs.502.90 crores for 1734 courts in India .Almost 32.34 lakh cases disposed of in 10 years. •Brij Mohan Lal v/s Union of India:-SC directed centre to provide funds to states to set up fast track courts •Current strength -450.Eg:- TN mahila adalats. •Proposal –set up 5 fast track courts in each distt. ,to take up cases involving undertrials(those booked for petty offences),juveniles,violence against women & senior citizens.

GRAM NYAYALAYAS •Gram Nyayalayas under Gram Nyayalaya Act,2008. •To be headed by Nyayadhikari having the same benefits as Judicial Magistrates of first class. •Allows plea bargaining. •Proposal to set up 5000 new courts at village level •Objective- Reducing pendency of cases and ensuring speedy justice at village level.

LOK ADALATS •Lok Adalat- People’s Courts •Resolving disputes through mediation. •Legalised under Legal Service Authority Act ,1987 •Advantages :- 1)Avoiding lengthy procedures of normal courts. 2)Award is binding , No provision of appeal thus saving time. 3)Helps in decentralization of justice

EVENING COURTS •Gujarat model – 35000 cases cleared in Gujarat •Haryana model – 56 evening courts to be set up ; 4 done in Faridabad, Gurgaon, Hisar,Kamal. •Justice Pinto – Evening courts can help in faster settlement of

cases. •Extra Salaries must be paid to judges. •Advantages :- Less time consuming & more efficient.

MOBILE COURTS •First mobile court setup in Mewat district, Haryana. •Equipped to handle both civil and criminal cases, the mobile court carries a staff of 12. •Advantages: 1)Reduces the high cost and long delays that poor people undergo in pursuing justice 2)Accessible to remote and backward areas 3)Speeds up process of justice

WORK ETHICS

“Only laws cannot save democracy, it is lawyers and judges who inspire respect for the laws”- P. Sathasivan (Present Chief Justice of India)

Adjournments

• There are enormous procedural delays due to frequent adjournments. The system of multiple appeals and revisions, numerous interim and interlocutory applications, indiscriminate adjournments contribute to the cost of litigation and delay. Adjournments should be granted in rare cases and hence delay in justice can be reduced

Frivolous cases

• Frivolous cases adds up to the burden of judiciary. So lawyers should discourage litigants who approach courts in frivolous cases. Hence maximum litigations can be minimized. In order to reduce these cases the follow up of following act is necessary-”Prevention of vexetious litigation act”

Out of court settlements

• Since there are lots of cases pending in the courts therefore encoraging out of court settlements is required. It is the need of hour that lawyers and judges create an environment which promotes the given agenda.

Briefs

• Briefs must be exchanged between both the parties and it should also be submitted to the judge. This reduces the time lost in briefing done by both the parties during a trial.Hence reducing the time of hearing of cases.

Performance standards

• Adequate and comprehensive performance standards at court levels should be ensured. The Legal Services Authorities should become more efficient and cater services to masses.

INCREASING ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS

COLLABORATIVE LAW •Resolution not imposed •An attorney for each side facilitates resolution process within specifically contracted terms •Formalized process that is part of the litigation and court system •Generally used for divorce .

MEDIATION •Third party, facilitates resolution process •Resolution not imposed •Section 89 of CPC •Eg :- Bangalore Mediation Centre mediated 18000 cases from 2007-2012 with success rate of about 64% •Eg:- Lok Adalats

NEGOTIATION •Participation voluntary •No third party •An organization or a person could coach the parties “Helping people help themselves”

•Eg :- Plea bargaining

ARBITRATION •Third party, a private judge, resolution is imposed. •Scott Avery Clause:- contracts contain clause stating arbitration as the resolution method. •Governed by Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

IMPACTS AT MACRO LEVEL • Provides closure and speedy justice to the

victims and their kin

• Deterrent effects of conviction on criminals

• Enhances accountability and democratic governance

• Reinforces confidence in rule of law

• Enhances wealth production

HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION

• In a property case, two brothers and a married sister inheriting movable and immovable property of their father. One brother gives notice to his siblings demanding partition and equal share. The other siblings reply admitting the share. The dispute arises to which property should be distributed among the heirs. A suit for partition is filed and upon the admission of entitlement of shares, the Court immediately appointing a Commissioner to conduct inventory of movable property and suggest measures for division of immovable property. The Commissioner submitted joint report. Parties agree so far as distribution of movable as suggested by the Commissioner. With respect to the distribution of immovable property, a senior advocate is appointed by Court as mediator. The learned mediator holds two sittings and convinces parties about resolving dispute as early as possible to save money and court’s time. As the parties a re educated, they agree to the mediator’s suggestion and prepare consent terms and file the same before the Court. The Court accepts the Consent terms and the dispute is amicably resolved.

• From the date of sending the Notice, filing the suit, appointing Commissioner and thereafter the mediation proceedings and filing of consent terms, the time taken to complete this process is maximum 6 months. Ordinarily, the suit for partition is fought on ego and concludes in passing of preliminary decree takes at least 5 years. Thereafter, appeal to District Court and second appeal to High Court takes at least another 10 years. Sadly at the end, the real beneficiaries are not the litigants but more than 10 advocates who work on different stages and levels.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

• National Court Management Systems (NCMS) • Supreme Court

http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/ncms27092012.pdf (statistics for the Graph)

• http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/photo/18054716.cms • www.izquotes.com • http://indialawyers.wordpress.com/category/justice/ • http://www.va.gov/adr/Awards.asp • D D Basu • Report of the working group for the twelfth five year plan • Civil Services Chronicle issue sept.2011 • Lawcommissionofindia.nic.in