GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LOK SABHAdoj.gov.in/sites/default/files/LS-22-Nov-21-Dec-2011_0.pdf · 2016. 3....

8/11/2015 Untitled Page

data:text/html;charset=utf8,%3Ca%20name%3D%22%23top%22%20style%3D%22textdecoration%3A%20underline%3B%20color%3A%20rgb(0%2C%200… 1/1

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO 461

ANSWERED ON 24.11.2011

USE OF HINDI IN COURTS

461 . Nagar Shri Surendra Singh

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether the Union Government has taken or propose to take any steps to promote the use ofHindi in the Supreme Court and Fligh Courts of the Country; and

(b) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE (SHRI SALMAN KHURSHID)

(a) & (b) : Article 348(1) of the Constitution of India provides that all proceedings in theSupreme Court and in every High Court shall be in English language until Parliament by lawotherwise provides. Under Article 348(2) the Governor of the State may, with the previousconsent of the President, authorize the use of the Hindi language or any other language used forany official purpose of the. State, in the proceedings of the High Court having its principal seat inthat State provided that decrees, judgements or orders passed by such High Courts shall be inEnglish.

Under Section 7 of the Official Language Act, 1963, the use of Hindi or official language of aState in addition to the English language may be authorized, with the consent of the President ofIndia, by the Governor of the State for the purpose of judgments etc. made by the High Court forthat State.

No law has since been made in this regard by the Parliament. Therefore, English continues to bethe language for all the proceedings of the Supreme Court. However. Registries of the SupremeCourt and the Delhi High Court have been requested from time to time to encourage use of Hindiin administrative works.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR JUDICIARY

636 . Rathwa Shri Ramsinhbhai Patalbhai

Thakur Shri Anurag Singh

Rana Shri Jagdish Singh

Kashyap Shri Virender

Mahendrasinh Shri Chauhan


(a) the details of allocation of funds for the judiciary in the Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Five YearPlans;

(b) whether the Government proposes to formulate a scheme to provide speedy and affordablejustice in the country; (C) if so, the details thereof; and

(d) the steps taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI SALMAN KHURSHID)

(a) : The Central Assistance provided to the States and UTs since the Ninth, Tenth and EleventhFive Year Plans are as under:

Ninth Five Year Plan ‐ Rs. 376 crore

Tenth Five year Plan ‐ Rs. 700 crore

Eleventh Plan ‐ Rs. 1470 crore

(b) to (d) : The Cabinet, in its meeting held on 23.06.2011 has approved the setting up of theNational Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms, The Mission spanning 5 years from20112016 would focus on increasing access to justice by reducing delays and arrears in thesystem.

The National Mission will focus on improvement in administration of justice and justice deliveryand legal reforms addressing diverse needs of all sections of stakeholders. An illustrative andtentative Action Plan indicating nodal responsibility, resource requirements, time lines etc., hasbeen formulated by the Department of Justice. The Action Plan, interalia covers five strategicinitiatives viz. Policy and Legislative changes, Reengineering of procedures, Human ResourceDevelopment, leveraging of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for better justicedelivery and improving infrastructure. The tentative Action Plan will be discussed and revised asadvised by the governing bodies of the Mission and finalised for implementation.

Infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary will be a major programme under theNational Mission. In order to augment the resources of the State Governments for developmentof infrastructure facilities for the judiciary, a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) had been inoperation since 199394. Under the National Mission, the existing CSS has been modified byincreasing the ratio of Central / State assistance from 50:50 to 75:25 focusing on court buildingsand residential quarters for subordinate judiciary. In case of NorthEastern State, the ratio wouldbe 90:10. The modified CSS is to be implemented in a mission mode approach over the years20112016.

The National Mission comprises of an Advisory Council, Governing Council, National Mission



Leader and the Mission Directorate. Advisory and Governing Council has been constituted. TheSecretary, Department of Justice will be the National Mission Leader.

(b): With the objective of improving justice delivery, Thirteenth Finance Commission hasrecommended a grant of Rs. 5000 crore to be utilized over a period of five years up to 20102015. This grant is aimed at providing support to improve judicial outcomes, and is allocated forthe initiatives such as (i) Increasing the number of court working hours using the existing infrastructure by holdingmorning / evening / shift courts; (ii) Enhancing support to Lok Adalats to reduce the pressure onregular courts; (iii) Providing additional funds to State Legal Services Authorities to enable themto enhance legal aid to the marginalized and empower them to access justice; (iv) Promoting theAlternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism to resolve part of the disputes outside the courtsystem; (v) Enhancing capacity of judicial officers and public prosecutors through trainingprogrammes; (vi) Supporting creation or strengthening of a judicial academy in each State tofacilitate such training; (vii) Creation of the post of Court Managers in every judicial district andHigh Courts to assist the judiciary in their administrative functions and (viii) Maintenance ofheritage court buildings.

(c): The Government is implementing a central sector scheme for computerization of the Districtand Subordinate Courts (eCourts project) in the country and for upgradation of the ICTinfrastructure of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, at a cost of Rs. 935 crore for the firstphase which will connect 14,229 courts in the country including video conferencing facilities. Inthe subsequent phase, digitization, library management, efiling and establishment of datawarehouse are expected to take place. The Project output would be beneficial to both improvingcourt process and rendering citizen centric services. Automation of case flow would cover casescrutiny, registration, court proceedings and electronic monitoring of all courtwise casependency and performance assessment of Judges. In terms of citizen centric services, onlineavailability of case status, copies of orders and judgments, cause list and eventually efiling ofcases will be available. This project will also achieve one of the important goals of the VisionDocument 2009, namely, the creation of National Arrears Grid, with the last mile connectivity upto Taluqa courts. The complete coverage of the 14,249 courts in terms of hardware and softwarewill be achieved by March 2014 and the largest number of courts (12,000) will be covered byMarch 2012.

(d): Enactment of the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 which provides for establishment of GramNyayalayas to improve access to justice to common man. Under the scheme, the Governmentprovides non recurring grant for creation of infrastructure and also recurring grant on annualbasis. Rs. 21.80 crore have been provided to the States till 201011 under this scheme.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



FUNDS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IN JUDICIARY

638 . Vasava Shri Mansukhbhai D.

Jaiswal Shri Gorakh Prasad


(a) the Statesin which judiciary is still functioning in old infrastructure without modernamenities like computers and lack of civic amenities also as on date; and

(b) the funds allocated by the Union Government for development of infrastructure facilities forjudiciary to various States during the last three years alongwith the details of the funds utilizedby those States?

ANSWER


(a): The development of infrastructure facilities for judiciary is the primary responsibility of theState Government. The Supreme Court of India in Interlocutory Application No. 279/2010 in WP(C) No. 1022/1989 in All India Judges Association & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors has directedthe State Governments to submit detailed information in prescribed format regarding theinfrastructure facilities of subordinate judiciary. The matter is pending in the ` Supreme Court.However, The Department of Justice is implementing a Centrally Sponsored Scheme fordevelopment of infrastructure facilities for the judiciary since 199394 to augment the resourcesof the State Governments / UTs in this regard. Earlier, the scheme covering construction of courtbuildings and residential accommodation of judicial officers/judges of the High Courts and theSubordinate Courts. The Government has approved setting up of the National Mission for JusticeDelivery and Legal Reforms in June 2011 under which the infrastructure development for thejudiciary is a thrust area. Centrally Sponsored Scheme funds now supporting infrastructure forsubordinate judiciary only will be implemented by the Mission.

Under the modified scheme, the ratio of central assistance has been increased from 50:50 basisto 75:25 basis, except in the case of the States in North Eastern Region, where the Centre / Stateshare ratio is on 90:10 basis. The releases to States/UTs are made based on their demand, theresources available with the centre and the receipt of utilization certificate (including State`sshare) for the past releases.

The Government is implementing a central sector scheme for computerization of the District andSubordinate Courts (eCourts project) in the country and for upgradation of the ICTinfrastructure of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, at a cost of Rs. 935 crore for the firstphase which will connect 14,229 courts in the country including video conferencing facilities. Inthe subsequent phase, digitization, library management, efiling and establishment of datawarehouse are expected to take place. The Project output would be beneficial to both improvingcourt process and rendering citizen centric services. Automation of case flow would cover casescrutiny, registration, court proceedings and electronic monitoring of all courtwise casependency and performance assessment of Judges. In terms of citizen centric services, onlineavailability of case status, copies of orders and judgments, cause list and eventually efiling ofcases will be available. This project will also achieve one of the important goals of the VisionDocument 2009, namely, the creation of National Arrears Grid, with the last mile connectivity upto Taluqa courts. The complete coverage of the 14,249 courts internls of hardware and softwarewill be achieved by March 2014 and the largest number of courts (12,000) will be covered byMarch 2012.

(b): A Statement indicating the funds allocated by the Union Government for development ofinfrastructure facilities for judiciary, Gram Nyayalayas and Computerization to various States



during the last three years is annexed at Annexure, The funds to the States are released onlyafter they submit utilization certificate of the funds released to them in the past year.

8/11/2015 Annexure

http://164.100.47.132/Annexture_New/lsq15/9/au638.htm 1/1

Annexure

LOK SABHA ANNEXURE UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 638 DATED 24112011

ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR TUDICIARY

(Rs. in crore)

Name of the 200809 200910 201011 201112Scheme BE Release BE Release BE Release BE Release*

Development ofinfrastructurefacilities for the judiciary

133.00 128.27 125.60 175.70** 110.00 142.74** 542.90 224.19

Computerization ofd i s t r i c t andsubordinate courts

26.40 25.90 115.00 62.36 120.00 120.00 297.00 90.00

Assistance *:o thestateGovernments forestablishment ofGram Nyayalayas

0 0 10.90 13.47 40.00 7.45 150.00 0.88

Total 159.4 154.70 251.50 251.53 270.00 263.485 1000 315.07

# As on 21/11/2011

# Includes reappropriation.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



CORRUPTION IN JUDICIARY

661 . Laguri Shri Yashbant Narayan Singh

Ajay Kumar SHRI


(a) whether rampant corruption is prevailing in judiciary due to which people are not gettingjustice;

(b) the reaction of the Government thereto;

(c) the steps taken by the Government to check corruption prevailing on a large scale in the thirdpillar of democracy the judiciary; and

(d) the extent of success achieved from the steps taken?

ANSWER


(a) to (d) : Allegations of corruption in the judiciary have come to the notice of the Governmentand have been reported in the press also from time to time.

Accountability in the higher judiciary is, at present, being enforced and maintained through an`inhouse` system of the judiciary. As per this procedure, the Chief Justice of the High Court hasthe competence to receive complaints against the conduct of the Judges of his Court. The ChiefJustice of India acts in a similar manner in regard to complaints relating to conduct of Judges ofthe Supreme Court and Chief Justices of the High Courts.

Removal of Judges by impeachment is governed by Article 124 (4) read with proviso (b) toArticle 124 (2) and proviso (b) to Article 217 (1) of the ConstitutionJThe Judges (Inquiry) Act,1968 lays down the procedure for the removal of Judges of High Courts and the Supreme Courtfor proved misbehaviour or incapacity, by way of address of the Houses of Parliament toPresident.

To ensure greater accountability and transparency in the higher judiciary, a Bill titled, `TheJudicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010` was introduced in the Lok Sabha on01.12.2010. The Bill provides a statutory mechanism for enquiring into individual complaintsagainst the Judges of the High Court and Supreme Court, enabling declaration of assets andliabilities by the Judges and lays down judicial standards.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



VIDEO CONFERENCING IN COURTS

674 . Singh Shri Vijay Bahadur

Siddeswara Shri Gowdar Mallikarjunappa

Shanavas Shri M. I.


(a) whether the Government proposes to interconnect all the courts in the country throughinternet;

(b) if so, the details thereof alongwith the allocation of funds during the last three years;

(c) whether all the courts are connected/proposed to be connected through video conferencingfacilities in the country;

(d) if so, the details thereof ; and

(e) the number of high courts in the country which have a completed information andcommunication technology system in place?

ANSWER


(a) & (b): Yes, Madam. The Government is implementing a central sector scheme forcomputerization of the District and Subordinate Courts eCourts project) in the country and forupgradation of the ICT infrastructure of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, at a cost of Rs.935 crore for the first phase. Under the Project 14249 courts will be connected throughSWAN/NICNET/broadband.

Allocation of funds for the last three years on computerization is as under:

(Rs. in crore)

Name of the Scheme Allocation of funds

2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12

Computerization of District 26.40 115.00 120,00 297.00and Subordinate courts

(c) & (d) : Under the Ecourts Project, Video conference facility has been provided at the HighCourts Shimla, Jammu & Kashmir (Jammu and Srinagar), Gauhati and its 6 Benches. Theinstallation of video conference facility for Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur and Jodhpur) andCalcutta High Court including Andaman is under process. Video Conferencing facility will beprovided at 500 District Courts also.

(e) : The Supreme Court of India and all 21 High Courts have been made ICT enabled. They arealso connected through internet.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



UPGRADATION OF COURTS

1641. Reddy Shri Modugula Venugopala


(a) whether the Government plans to augment the infrastructure of the subordinate courtsacross the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof;

(c) whether the Government has a standard benchmarking that flags the minimum levels offacilities that should mandatorily be present in a judicial complex at the subordinate courts`level;

(d) the total cost involved in upgrading all the subordinate court complexes;

(e) whether the Government proposes to generate adequate resources including raising of thecourt fees to fund the upgradation of subordinate courts; and

(f) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a)&(b); Yes, Madam. The Government has approved setting up of the National Mission forJustice Delivery and Legal Reforms in June 2011 under which the infrastructure developmentfor the judiciary is a thrust area. A Centrally Sponsored Scheme for the development ofinfrastructure facilities for judiciary is now under implementation by the Mission.

Under the modified scheme, the ratio of central assistance has been increased from 50:50 basisto 75:25 basis, except in the case of the States in North Eastern Region, where the Centre / Stateshare ratio is on 90:10 basis.

The Government is implementing a central sector scheme for computerization of the District andSubordinate Courts (eCourts project) in the country and for upgradation of the ICTinfrastructure of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, at a cost of Rs. 935 crore for the firstphase which will connect 14,249 courts in the country.

(c): No such standard has been fixed by the Central Government. It is for the State Governmentsand Courts to decide.

(d): On the basis of the information received from the State Governments, the total cost ofimprovement of infrastructure facilities for subordinate judiciary is tentatively estimated to thetune of Rs. 7345.65 crore,

(e)&(f): The Central Government has no proposal for raising of court fees. The levying of courtfees on institution and trial of suits and petitions presented to various High Courts and lowercourts is regulated under the Court Fees` Act, 1870. This is Central enactment. However, underthe Devolution Act, 1920 the power to amend the Act in its application to the States has beendelegated to the State Governments.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



BENCHES OF HIGH COURT AND SUPREME COURT

1732. Biju Shri P. K.

Meena Shri Raghuvir Singh


(a) whether the Government has received proposals from various State Governments for settingup of regional Benches of Supreme Court and High Courts in their respective States;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the status of the proposals received till date, Statewise;

(c) the details of the criteria adopted by the Government for setting up of additional Benches ofHigh Court in the States; and

(d) the number of such benches set up so far and number of Benches proposed to be set up inthe country, Statewise?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRl SALMAN KHURSHID)

(a) and (b): No proposal has been received from any State Government for establishment ofregional Benches of the Supreme Court.

The Government of Karnataka has sent a proposal for making two Circuit Benches of theKarnataka High Court at Dharwad and Gulbarga as Permanent Benches, which is underconsideration of the Government.

The Government of West Bengal had sent a proposal for establishment of a Circuit Bench of theCalcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri. The Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court had inspected theinfrastructural facilities provided by the State Government at Jalpaiguri for establishment of thetemporary Circuit Bench till the permanent building of the Circuit Bench is ready. However, in hisopinion, the infrastructural facilities provided for establishment of the temporary Circuit Bench inthe Jalpaiguri Zilla Parishad Dak Bungalow are neither satisfactory nor the premises suitable,even for temporary period. The space and accommodation provided is also insufficient.

The Chief Minister of Kerala had sent a request in the year 2005 for setting up a bench of KeralaHigh Court at Thiruvananthapuram. He was advised to seek consent of the Chief Justice of theHigh Court as envisaged in Supreme Court Judgment in case of Federation of Bar Association inKarnataka vs. Union of India (AIR 2000 SC 2544). No reply has been received from theGovernment of Kerala.

The Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh has sent a request for establishment of a Bench ofHimachal Pradesh High Court at Dharamsala. The Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Courthas not given a recommendation so far.

(c): Setting up of benches of High Courts away from their principal seats is considered by theCentral Government on receipt of a complete proposal from the State Government which has theconsent of the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court.

(d): A list of High Courts and their Benches is annexed in AnnexureI.

8/11/2015 ANNEXURE REFERRED TO IN REPLY OF LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO


ANNEXURE REFERRED TO IN REPLY OF LOK SABHAUNSTARRED QUESTION NO:1732

NAME OF HIGH COURTS, THEIR PRINCIPAL SEATS,BENCHES AND THEIR JURISDICTION

Si.

No.

High Court Principal

Seat

Jurisdiction Permanent Bench and Datefrom which the Bench beganfunctioning

1 Allahabad Allahabad Uttar Pradesh Lucknow (01.07.1948)2 Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh 3 Bombay Mumbai Maharashtra; Goa; Daman

& Diu; Dadra& NagarHaveli;

Nagpur (01.05.1960)Panaji (01.07.1948)Aurangabad (27.08.1984)

4 Calcutta Kolkata West Bengal & Andaman&Nicobar Islands

5 Chattisgarh Bilaspur Chattisgarh 6 Delhi "New Delhi NCT of Delhi 7 Gauhati Guwahati Assam, Meghalaya,

Nagaland, Manipur,Tripura, Mizoram, &Arunachal Pradesh.

Kohima, (10.02.1990)Aizawl, (05.07.1990)Impha!, (21.01.1992)Agartala, (10.05.1992)Shillong (04.02.1998)Itanagar (12.08.2000)

8 Gujarat Sola(Ahmedabad)

Gujarat

9 Himachai Pradesh Shimla Himachai Pradesh 10 Jammu & Kashmir Jammu &

SrinagarJammu & Kashmir

11 Jharkhand Ranch i Jharkhand 12 Karnataka Bangalore Karnataka Circuit Benches Dharwad

(07.02.2008)

Gulbarga (07.02.2008)13 Kerala Kochi Kerala & l.akshadweep

Islands

14 Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh Gwalior (01.11.1956)Indore (01.11.1956)

15 Madras Chennai Tamil Nadu &Pondicherry

Madurai (24.07.2004)

16 Orissa Cuttack Orissa 17 Patna Patna Bihar 18 Punjab & Haryana Chandigarh Punjab, Haryana &

Chandigarh

19 Rajasthan Jodhpur Rajasthan Jaipur (31.01.1977)20 Sikkirn Gangtok Sikkim 21 Uttarakhand Nainital Uttarakhand

> There are 21 High Courts in the Country.

> Only 6 High Courts (Allahabad, Bombay, Gauhati, Madhya Pradesh, Madras and

8/11/2015 ANNEXURE REFERRED TO IN REPLY OF LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO


Rajasthan) have 14 Permanent Benches amongst themselves

> Only Karnataka High Court has two Circuit Benches at Dharwad and Gulbarga.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



FAST TRACK COURTS

1837. Rao Shri Kavuri Samba Siva

Lagadapati Shri Rajagopal


(a) the number of Fast Track Courts (FTCs) functioning as on date, State wise;

(b) whether central funding for FTCs has been stopped since 31.03.2011;

(c) If so; the reasons therefor;

(d) whether the 13th Finance Commission had set apart Rs, 5000 crore for FTCs; and

(e) if so, the funds/grant released to States out of that fund during the last one year?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE (SHRI SALMAN KHURSHID)

(a): A statement is enclosed.

(b): Yes, Madam.

(c): The Eleventh Finance Commission recommended a scheme for creation of 1734 Fast TrackCourts (FTCs) in the country for disposal of long pending Sessions and other cases. Fast TrackCourts are set up by the State Governments in consultation with the respective High Court. Thescheme was for a period of 5 years. The Government accorded its approval for the continuationof 1562 Fast Track Courts that were operational as on 31.3.2005 for a further period of 5 yearsi.e. up to 319t March, 2010. The scheme of central assistance for Fast Track Courts was furtherextended for a period of one year i.e. upto 31.3.2011.

Fast Track Courts were supported by the 11th Finance Commission ; onetime measure to reducethe pendency of the session`s cases and were further continued by the Central Government for5 years. It was felt that if the term of these courts is extended from time to time, then thesecourts virtually become part of the regular judicial structure which was not intended. The role ofthe Central Government should be more in the area of supporting infrastructure development,capacity building and procedural reforms rather than meeting the recurring costs of courts whichis the responsibility of the State Governments. Therefore, it was decided to support these courtsfor another year so that there could be a smooth transition and to stop central funding beyond31.3.2011. However there is no bar on State Governments, if they so wish, to continue fundingthese courts fully.

(d): Grant for the Fast Track Courts scheme is not recommended by the Thirteenth FinanceCommission (TFC). With the objective of improving justice delivery, Thirteenth FinanceCommission (TFC) has recommended a grant of 5000 Cr to be utilized over a period of five yearsup to 201015. This grant is aimed at providing support to improve judicial outcomes, and isallocated for the initiatives such as (i) Increasing the number of court working hours using theexisting infrastructure by holding morning / evening / shift courts; (ii) Enhancing support to LokAdalats to reduce the pressure on regular courts; (iii) Providing additional funds to State LegalServices Authorities to enable them to enhance legal aid to the marginalized and empower themto access justice; (iv) Promoting the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism to resolvepart of the disputes outside the court system; (v) Enhancing capacity of judicial officers andpublic prosecutors through training programmes; (vi) Supporting creation or strengthening of a



judicial academy in each State to facilitate such training; (vii) Creation of the post of CourtManagers in every judicial district to assist the judiciary in their administrative functions and(viii) Maintenance of heritage court buildings.

(e): Does not arise.

8/11/2015 STATEMENT REFERED TO IN PART


STATEMENT REFERED TO IN PART (a) OF THE LOK 5ABHA UNSTARRED QUESTIONNO. 1837 FOR

1 DECEMBER, 2011

(INFORMATION AVAILABLE UPTO 28.11.2011)

SI.No. Name of the States No, of FTCsfunctional

As on

1 2 3 41 ANDHRA PRADESH 108 Oct. 112 ARUNACHAL PRADESH 3 Aug.113 ASSAM 20 Oct. 114 BIHAR 179 March,115 CHHATTISGARH 25 March, 116 GUJARAT 61 Dec. 107 GOA 5 Sep. 118 HARYANA 6 Dec. 109 HIMACHAL PRADESH 9 Sep. 1110 JHARKHAND 0 May1111 KARNATAKA 93 Oct1112 KERELA 38 Sep.1113 MADHYA PRADESH 84 Sep. 1014 MAHARASHTRA 67 Dec.1015 MANIPUR 2 Oct.11 16 MEGHALAYA 3 Oct. 1117 MIZORAM 3 Oct. 1118 NAGALAND 2 Oct. 1119 ORISSA 35 Aug.1120 PUNJAB 15 Dec.1021 RAJASTHAN 83 Mar1122 TAMIL NADU 49 Dec. 0823 TRIPURA 3 Aug.1124 UTTARAKHAND 18 Aug.11

25 UTTAR PRADESH 153 Mar11

8/11/2015 STATEMENT REFERED TO IN PART


26 WEST BENGAL 150 Aug.11

TOTAL 1214



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA

STARRED QUESTION NO 203


LEGAL REFORMS TO CHECK CRIME AGAINST WOMEN

203 . Bundela Shri Jeetendra Singh

M.Thambidurai Dr.


(a) the number of cases of crime against women filed in various courts of the country during thelast three years and the current year;

(b)the number of cases in which decisions have been pronounced by the courts and the numberof cases still pending;

(c) whether the Government is considering to set up separate fast track courts to deal with crimeagainst women;

(d) if so, the details thereof; and

(e) if not, the legal reforms contemplated, if any, by the Government to deal with the increasingnumber of cases of crime against women?

ANSWER


(a) to (e): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO THE LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. 203 TO BEANSWERED ON 08.12.2011 REGARDING LEGAL REFORMS TO CHECK CRIME AGAINST WOMEN.

(a): The number of cases of crime against women reported in the country by National CrimeRecords Bureau (NCRB) in the last three years, is as under:

Year No. of cases of crime reported

2008 1,95,856

2009 2,03,804

2010 2,13,585

Since NCRB brings out the data annually, the number of cases during the current year is notavailable.

(b): Such information is in the domain of judiciary and not maintained by the CentralGovernment.

(c) & (d): There is no such proposal under consideration of the Government.

(e): The Government has undertaken a series of measures which include amendment of existing



laws, making of new laws as well as initiatives to bring down the pendency in the courts. TheHigh Powered Committee under the Chairmanship of Union Home Secretary has examined theexisting provisions in ragard to rape under the Indian Penal Code and has maderecommendations for amendments. Two new legislations, namely, Protection of Women againstSexual Harassment at Workplace Bill, 2010 and Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Bill,2011 have been introduced in the Parliament. The first legislation seeks to provide safe, secureand enabling environment at workplace to every woman regardless of her age or employmentstatus. There are specific redressal mechanisms provided for under the Bill which will covercases of all women in the organized as well as unorganized sector. The second Bill will provideprotection to children including girl child from offences against sexual assault, sexualharassment and pornography. By creating a presumption in favour of the accused of havingcommitted the offence if the child is beiow 16 years of age, the Bill seeks to provide assuredprotection against commission of such offences. There are also provisions incorporated in the Billfor speedy trial of cases.

The pendency reduction drive is an initiative which has been launched in a campaign mode to beundertaken by the courts between JulyDecember, 2011 for clearing petty cases as well as theold pending cases. During this campaign, special attention will be given to cases relating towomen, senior citizens and other marginalized groups.

Other measures include increasing the number of court working hours using the existinginfrastructure by holding Morning / Evening / Shift Courts for disposal of petty cases. A provisionof Rs.2,500 crore for the period 201015 has been made for the purpose on the recommendationof Thirteenth Finance Commission. A module is also being developed for Training of Judges onlaws and issues relating to marginalized people including women, children, SC/ST.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



FOREIGN TRIBUNALS IN ASSAM

2336. Ajmal Shri Badruddin


(a) whether the Government is planning to provide basic facilities to the Foreigner`s Tribunalsin Assam to ensure speedy disposal of the cases;


(c) whether there is acute shortage of Judges.in Tribunals resulting in slowdown in the processof disposal of cases;


(e) the steps taken by the Government in this regard to issue necessary instructions for smoothfunctioning of these Tribunals?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF THE STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE (SHRI SALMAN KHURSHID)

(a) &(b) : Expenditure incurred by the Government of Assam on the administration of ForeignersTribunals is cent percent reimbursable by the Ministry of Home Affairs. An amount of Rs.1.27crore was provided to Government of Assam in the year 200708 for office infrastructure andequipments for the Foreigners Tribunals. Further, an amount of Rs.27.00 lakhs was released in201011 in this regard.

(c) & (d) : Out of 36 Foreigners Tribunals set up in Assam, seven positions are lying vacant. Inorder to fill these vacancies, Registrars of various High Courts have been requested to send panelof the retired/sitting Additional District Judges and District Judges. The terms and conditions forappointment of judicial officers as members of Foreigners Tribunals have been revised inJanuary, 2011.

(e) : The functioning of Foreigners Tribunals is reviewed periodically in the Ministry of HomeAffairs. The Government of Assam has been advised to prepare an Action Plan for disposal ofpending cases and smooth functioning of the Foreigners Tribunals.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONS

2344. Reddy Shri Modugula Venugopala


(a) the number of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed in the Supreme Court and various HighCourts, courtwise;

(b) whether the Government is aware of large number of frivolous litigations being filed underthe guise of PIL;

(c) if so, the details thereof and the reaction of the Government thereto;

(d) whether the Government proposes to initiate action to check such frivolous litigations; and

(e) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a) to (e) : The data regarding number of Public Interest Litigations filed in the Courts is notmaintained by the Department of Justice as the matter falls exclusively within the jurisdiction ofthe higher judiciary. The matter of entertaining or curbing PILs is within the domain of theCourts in which they are filed. The Hon`ble Supreme Court of India has, from time to time,provided certain guidelines in their various orders to check the misuse of Public InterestLitigation (PIL) by unscrupulous elements.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



CHEQUE BOUNCE CASES

2364. Dhruvanarayana Shri R.


(a) whether there is a huge pendency of cheque bounce cases in the country;

(b) If so, the details thereof;

(c) whether the Government proposes to set up fast track courts to deal with such litigations;

(d) if so, the details thereof;

(e) the present status thereof in each State including Karnataka; and

(f) the views of the State Governments in this regard?

ANSWER


(a)&(b): Information on pendency of cheque bounce cases is not maintained centrally. However,as per 213th Report of the Law Commission of India, over 38 lakh cheque bouncing cases werepending in the courts in the country.

(c)&(d): No, Madam. However, Government of India has decided to give a special grant of Rs.5000 crore to States on the basis of recommendations of the 13th Finance Commission forimproved delivery of justice. One of the components of this grant includes increasing the numberof Court working hours using the existing infrastruct£O£y by holding morning/evening/shiftcourts. These courtsdispose off various types of petty cases including chec bounce cases.Besides, capacity enhancement of the mechanisms such as Lok Adalats and Legal Aid, alternateDispute Resolution centres, creation of State Judicial Academies, training of JudicialOfficers/Public Prosecutors is also envisaged under 13th Finance Commission funding. The LokAdalats will also help dispose of the cheque bounce cases.

(e)&(f): In view of (c) & (d) above, the questions do not arise.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES

2450. Jeyadural Shri S. R.


(a) whether the Government is contemplating a review in the process of the appointment ofHigh Court and Supreme Court Judges;


(c) whether the Government proposes to bring a Constitutional Amendment Bill to connect theconstitutional balance of the separation of powers doctrine that has been upset by the 1993 &1998 `Advocates on Record` judgement on the separation of powers;


(e) the status of the Judicial Standards & Accountability Bill that was introduced in the RajyaSabha?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF THE STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI SALMAN KHURSHID)

(a) to (d): The existing procedure for appointment of Judges of the Supreme Court of India andthe High Courts, is based on the Supreme Court Judgment of October 6, 1993 in the case ofSupreme Court Advocates on Record & Anr. Vs. Union of India and the Advisory Opinion datedOctober 28, 1998. This has been debated in various fora and there have been demands made tochange the same. However, no proposal has been finalised by Government.

(e): The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on01.12.2010 and was referred to the Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee forexamination and Report. The Committee has submitted is Report to the Parliament on 30.8.2011.In the light of these recommendations, the process for making amendments to said bill has beeninitiated.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



MISUSE OF SECTION A

2520. Owaisi Shri Asaduddin


to the Unstarred Question No.2772 answered on 18 August, 2011 regarding Misuse of Section498A and state:

(a) whether the information has since been collected;

(b) if so, the details thereof; and

(c) the time by which changes under this section are likely to be suggested by the LawCommission?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE(SHRI SALMAN KHURSHID)

(a): Yes, Madam.

(b)& (c): In the cases Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand (decided on August 13, 2010) andRamgopal v. State of M.P.(Order dated July 30, 2010) relating to Section 498A, the Hon`bleSupreme Court of India has observed that complaints are not always bonafide and are at timesfiled with oblique motive. The Court has, interalia, requested the Law Commission of India toexamine different aspects of Section 498A including that of making it compoundable.

The Law Commission of India has considered the above decisions of the Hon`ble Supreme Courtof India. As per the information received by the Commission, more than one lakh cases arepending. The subject relating to Section 498A has been discussed at the meeting of LawCommission of India held on 31st October, 2011 and in the light of deliberations, the LawCommission will prepare the Report which will detail the need to make the offence under Section498A IPC compoundable` or not. The Report will also deal with other aspects relating to Section498A such as making it bailable, process of arrest, conciliation etc.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA

STARRED QUESTION NO 308


SPECIAL COURTS

308 . Kataria Shri Lal Chand

Thomas Shri P. T.


(a) whether the Supreme Court, recently urged the Government to tackle agitations blocking railand road traffic and consider setting up of Special Courts to prosecute such agitators;

(b) if so, the reaction of the Government thereto;

(c) whether the Government proposes to set up such Courts; and

(d) if so, the time by which these are likely to be set up?

ANSWER


(a)to(d): A statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO THE LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION No 308 TO BEANSWERED ON 15.12.201 REGARDING SPECIAL COURTS.

(a)to(d): As per the information received from the Ministry of Railways, no order has been madeby Hon`ble Supreme Court of India to set up Special Courts to prosecute the agitators blockingrail & road traffic. Therefore, there is no proposal for setting up of special courts for the purpose.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



CASES OF UNDERPRIVILEGED SECTIONS

3454. Aaron Rashid Shri J.M.


(a) the number of corporate related cases disposedoff by the High Courts and the Apex Courtduring the last three years;

(b) the number of cases concerning the under privileged sections disposedoff by the HighCourts and the Apex Court during the last three years; and

(c) the measures proposed to be taken by the Government to ensure that matters pertaining tounder privileged persons are disposedoff by these courts within a reasonable time frame?

ANSWER


(a) & (b): No such data is being maintained centrally.

(c): Disposal of cases in the courts is within the domain of the judiciary. However, Governmenthas requested all the High Courts to launch a pendency reduction drive in a mission mode in thecourts from 01.07.2011 to 31.12.2011. The High Courts have also been requested to givepriority to disposal of long pending cases pertaining to senior citizens, minors, disabled and othermarginalized groups.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT

3603. Thamaraiselvan Shri R.

Gaikwad Shri Eknath Mahadeo

Paranjpe Shri Anand Prakash

Bhoi Shri Sanjay


(a) whether the Chief Justice of India has expressed that the judiciary will identify and expeditedisposal of cases which are pending for more than five years;

(b) if so, the details in this regard;

(c) whether Chief Justice of India has also suggested to the Government to provide a policestation with each court dealing with Negotiable Instrument Act cases;

(d) if so, the details thereof;

(e) the reaction of the Union Government thereon; and

(f) the steps taken/being taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) to (d): In his Law Day speech on 26th November, 2011, Hon`ble the Chief Justice of Indiainteralia mentioned that 74% of the cases are less than five years old. The focus should then bethe expeditious disposal of 26% of cases which are more than five years old. Nearly 37,95,000cases are pending in the Subordinate Courts only under one Section, namely, Section 138. Thisis mainly due to problems in effecting service of summons. In this context, the Chief Justice ofIndia observed in his address that one of the solutions to this problem can be the attachment ofpolice stations to the courts handling such cases. The court duty constables could be deployednot only for security reasons but could also be used to collect warrants from courts to be handedover to the concerned police stations through which warrants could be served.

(e) & (f): Government has requested all the High Courts to launch a pendency reduction drive inMission mode from 01.07.2011 to 31.12.2011. The High Courts have also been requested to givepriority to disposal of long pending cases pertaining to senior citizens, minors, disabled and othermarginalized groups. Further, provision for a grant of Rs.2500 crore has been made on therecommendation of the 13th Finance Commission for increasing the working hours of the courtsby holding morning/ evening / shift / special magistrates` courts with a view to expeditingdisposal of petty cases including the cases under Negotiable Instruments Act.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



CHANGE IN THE NAME OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT

3635. Gavit Shri Manikrao Hodlya


(a) whether the Bombay High Court in Maharashtra has sent many letters to the UnionGovernment seeking approval to change its name to Mumbai High Court;

(b) if so, the details of the action taken thereon so far;

(c) whether the Government proposes to send its approval to the State Government in thisregard;


(e) if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER


(a) to (e): The Government of Maharashtra has sent a proposal for changing the name of the`Bombay High Court` as the `Mumbai High Court` which is under consideration of theGovernment.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LOK SABHAdoj.gov.in/sites/default/files/LS-22-Nov-21-Dec-2011_0.pdf · 2016. 3....

Documents

Transcript of GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LOK SABHAdoj.gov.in/sites/default/files/LS-22-Nov-21-Dec-2011_0.pdf · 2016. 3....