Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Sunday, November 24, 2024

Fast Tracking The Entire Criminal Justice System Is Imperative Now

Posted in: Criminal Law
Mon, Jun 7, 21, 13:25, 4 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 3575
To begin with , in no uncertain terms had the Supreme Court responded with alacrity to PM Narendra Modi's suggestion to fast track trials in criminal cases against MPs

To begin with , in no uncertain terms had the Supreme Court responded with alacrity to PM Narendra Modi's suggestion to fast track trials in criminal cases against MPs by emphasizing that the Centre should look at fast-tracking the entire criminal justice system instead . A bench of 3 Judges comprising of the then CJI RM Lodha and Justices Kurian Joseph and RF Nariman made it very clear that , It cannot happen piecemeal . If fast-tracking of trials against MPs is needed , it is equally true for cases involving women and senior citizens . No sane person will ever dispute what the bench of 3 Judges led by CJI said!

What a tragedy that UP tops the list among all the States in crimes against not only women but also all other types of crimes and yet has the least number of benches in India! What a tragedy that UP has been given only one bench and that too just about 200 km away from Allahabad at Lucknow and not anywhere else! This is so shocking and so ironical that more than 9 crore people of 26 districts of West UP have to travel whole night on an average more than 700 km all the way to Allahabad as there is no High Court Bench in West UP!

What a tragedy that time and again riots keep breaking out in West UP at either Moradabad or Meerut or Muzaffarnagar or Saharanpur as happened some years back in which 4 were killed and many injured and more than 250 shops were gutted and yet West UP comprising of 26 districts has no bench and people have to travel about 700 km on an average to get justice from faraway Allahabad! The bench of Apex Court led by the then CJI RM Lodha had rightly asked the government to explain how it intends to speed up the system so that the Constitution's resolve of justice to all is fulfilled!

It is terrible that lawyers of West UP comprising of 26 districts have been going on strike every Saturday since last more than four decades and as if this was not enough even went on strike for more than 6 months at a row on several occasions but Centre decided instead not to bother for West UP with a population of more than 9 crore and took no time to create 2 more benches for Karnataka at Dharwad and Gulbarga for just 4 and 8 districts even though they never went on strike for such a long period or even for a short period or even for a single day as lawyers of West UP did and still doing!

What a tragedy that ex UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon in his official capacity condemned the law and order situation in UP after 2 minor girls were gangraped and then hanged in Badaun publicly but Centre decides not to allow a single more bench to be created in UP while approving 2 more benches for Karnataka for just 4 and 8 districts at Dharwad and Gulbarga respectively!

What a tragedy that UP has more pending cases than Karnataka , has more Judges than Karnataka – UP has 160 and Karnataka has only 50 yet UP has one bench and Karnataka has 3 benches! On this score pertaining to lack of courts and benches , CJI RM Lodha said that:
Fast-tracking of cases without creation of additional courts and infrastructure creates more burden of the category of cases left out of the fast-track system . I have my own limitation as the Chief Justice of India as I cannot constitute more courts .

Even former CJI Ranjan Gogoi while hearing a PIL on setting up of High Court Bench in West UP filed by a woman lawyer KL Chitra in his official capacity as CJI in 2018 had acknowledged the dire need for a High Court Bench in West UP but clarified that it is for the Centre to take the final call on it! But Centre since 1947 has been very firm that under no circumstances can a single bench be allowed to come into existence not just in West UP but in any hook and corner of UP under any circumstances! This alone explains why the people of Uttaranchal had to travel about 1500 km all the way to Allahabad to get justice for 50 years until 2000 when it was created as a separate State after massive protests were held for months together!

What a tragedy that Ajay Shukla who was the Chairman of UP Bar Council openly expressed his support for the creation of a high court bench in West UP in his personal capacity but Centre is not prepared! The present UP Bar Council Chairman Rohitashwa Kumar Aggarwal who has been the President of Meerut Bar five times and has always led from the front the sacred demand to create a High Court Bench in West UP too fully supports this age old demand! He has even suffered head injuries while protesting the denial of a High Court Bench in West UP when police tried to stop lawyers! What a tragedy that two senior ministers of UP ex CM Akhilesh Yadav openly advocated the creation of 6 more high court benches in UP while addressing lawyers of Meerut Bar and claimed that Centre can create them whenever it wants but they are not prepared!

. What a tragedy that Justice Jaswant Commission appointed by late Mrs Indira Gandhi government in 1980s advocated the creation of 3 benches in West UP and one in Aurangabad in Maharashtra but Centre did not allow creation of a single bench in West UP while conceding a bench at Aurangabad! What a tragedy that 230th report of Law Commission advocated creation of more high court benches in big States like UP , Rajasthan , Bihar etc but Centre gave green signal only for Karnataka!

Ex-CJI RM Lodha also stated when he was CJI that , I have written to the Chief Justices of the High Courts too for fast-tracking cases involving senior citizens and women but they also have their own limitations... you don't need a huge investment for providing better infrastructure .

The bench also added that:
Fast-tracking is a must . You ( government ) have to come out with a comprehensive scheme . Take all the states into confidence and convene a meeting of all law secretaries and chief secretaries if required . We are worried about the pace of the system . This is the most important thing we have to do . You have to work really hard to improve the system .

Let me also bring out here that the bench made it clear that , There is a demand by you ( government ) that criminal trials involving MPs should be fast-tracked . Fast-tracking one type of cases cannot be at the cost of other kinds of cases . For how long will we keep on taking out one category of cases and creating special courts ? We are not fast-tracking the system with such approach . The CJI RM Lodha further added that , Setting up of additional courts cannot be just a symbolic gesture . There has to be a substantial and methodical approach . You ( government ) cannot have old mindset and an old burdened justice delivery system yet expect faster results . What wrong has he said?

Coming straight to the heart of the matter , let me say that it is heartwarming to learn that the law ministry , in consultation with the home ministry , is preparing a blueprint to reform the entire criminal justice system , with particular emphasis on fast-tracking trials of elected representatives which , as per a ruling of the Apex Court, should be completed within a year after registration of the case . Instances like J Jayalalithaa's conviction in a disproportionate assets case after 18 years and former Bihar CM Lalu Prasad's conviction after 17 years may soon be a thing of the past . All thanks to the law ministry preparing a blueprint to reform our entire criminal justice system by which cases against elected representatives will be decided at a faster pace within a year and not in decades as most unfortunately we see right now!

The guidelines to be soon communicated to Chief Justices of High Courts and Chief Ministers , provide for setting up of a special cell in each of the 24 High Courts where records of all cases filed against elected representatives will be maintained and updated on a quarterly basis . I must also mention here that earlier already former home minister Rajnath Singh and law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad have written to Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of High Courts to create a databank on all cases against elected representatives and ensure their trials are completed within a year , adhering to the Apex Court order. This is certainly a laudable step and deserves unadulterated and unqualified appreciation!

While craving for the exclusive indulgence of my esteemed readers , it would be pertinent to discuss briefly the main guidelines proposed to expedite cases and they are as follows:

 

  1. Role of Police:
    1. It has been proposed that the investigation to be completed within three months and chargesheet to be filed within six months in case of influential public personalities
    2. An investigating officer or the SSP to be made responsible for monitoring the completion of a probe and filing of chargesheet against a lawmaker charge-sheeted for heinous crimes within three months or face action
    3. The SSP has been made the supervisory authority responsible for all investigation to be completed in the specified period . Any failure can invite disciplinary proceedings against the SSP
    4. All confessions should be recorded by Magistrate under Section 164 of CrPC
    5. Where there are no formal complaints , police to register FIR based on credible information
    6. It would be mandatory for police to send FIR through email and update courts on all confessional statements electronically and details to be posted on website of the court concerned
       
  2. Role of Courts:
    1. Special cell is proposed in each High Court to take stock of old pending sessions case against MPs/MLAs
    2. In case the police is not cooperating , the district judge shall send a special report to the High Court
    3. High Court can invoke Article 235 of the Constitution to play their due role in ensuring the speedy disposal of criminal cases against influential persons
    4. Quarterly report to be generated by district judges on all cases against MPs/MLAs and record the stage of trial in each case and send to the High Court special cell
    5. When it comes to trials of MPs or MLAs , the district judges to be made responsible to monitor cases against politicians in sessions courts and ensure trials are completed within a year
    6. In case of delay in investigation , district judge may order arrest of accused and initiate action against the Senior Superintendent of Police ( SSP ) or Investigating Officer ( IO ) of the case
    7. Also, in case of delay , this has to be conveyed to the Chief Justice of the High court giving reasons for it


For my readers benefit , let me tell them that the guidelines proposing reform of the criminal justice system is being drawn based on various Supreme Courts judgments and incorporating recommendations of past reports of the Law Commission. The district judge may be vested with powers to arrest accused politicians in case he is found to be influencing the probe or take action against the superintendent of police in whose jurisdiction the case has been registered if the SP fails to complete the probe within three months of the FIR.

I have no doubt in my mind that the blueprint which the law ministry is preparing to reform our criminal justice system is much needed . At present , there is a lot of resentment and brewing anger in the mind of a common man that to acquire any job , you need a police verification and even if somebody maliciously and deliberately frame your name in a criminal case, you are barred from all government jobs but to become an MP or MLA, you can murder scores of innocents like Phoolan Devi and still enter Parliament, like former underworld don Arun Gawli and other mafias can contest elections even from jail itself! This all the more necessitates fast tracking the entire criminal justice system!

In addition, Centre must ensure that time limit is set for disposing of cases! This time limit must be strictly implemented also! Centre must ensure that all vacant posts of Judges are promptly filled up in totality both in lower courts and the High Courts!! Cases should be conducted online by virtual hearing as we see now in times of corona! All this will go a long way in fast tracking our entire criminal justice system which is most essential for the very survival of people's faith in judiciary and democracy to stay intact! No step should be spared which will ensure this to become a reality!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top