Flaws in the Current Indian Judicial System

Flaws in the Current Indian Judicial System

**Author:- Anusha Shrivastava, Law graduate from Prestige Institute of Management.

The Indian judicial system, as a crucial pillar of the world's largest democracy, has a long and storied history. From the days of monarchical rule to the British era and the present system of independent India, the judiciary has always sought to deliver justice for the innocent and punishment for the guilty. Administering a common law system, the Indian judicial system operates with a hierarchy of courts, including the Supreme Court, High Courts, District Courts, and Village Courts/Panchayats. However, despite the independence of the judiciary from the executive and legislative bodies, it faces numerous challenges and flaws that hinder its efficiency and effectiveness.

The Pendency of Cases

One of the major issues plaguing the Indian judicial system is the overwhelming pendency of cases. A backlog of cases has accumulated at all levels of the judiciary, causing significant delays in the delivery of justice. As of 2015, there were close to 400 vacancies for judges in the 24 High Courts across the country, contributing to the mounting number of pending cases. The Supreme Court alone had approximately 60,000 pending cases, while the total number of cases in various courts reached 25-30 million. Insufficient budget allocation for the judiciary, which stands at a mere 0.2 percent of the GDP, exacerbates the problem. The judge-population ratio is also inadequate, with only 10.5-11 judges per one million people, far below the recommended ratio of 50-55 judges per one million. This backlog of cases not only undermines the purpose of the judicial system but also denies justice to those who are awaiting resolution. Moreover, the backlog deters international investors and corporations from conducting business operations in India, hindering economic growth.

The delay in delivering judgments is a significant concern within the judicial system. The Indian courts have acknowledged that the delayed delivery of reasoned judgments violates the Right to Life as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. To address this issue, the courts have established guidelines that require judgments to be delivered within two months of the operative part of the decision. However, the adherence to these guidelines is often lacking. The lack of a time fixation for the final disposal of cases further contributes to the backlog and delays in the justice system. Additionally, the infrastructure of courtrooms is often inadequate, and the lower judiciary still heavily relies on traditional paperwork rather than leveraging technological resources. These factors, coupled with the quality of judges and the absence of a listing calendar in the Supreme Court, further hamper the efficiency of the judicial system.

Corruption

Corruption, which affects all pillars of democracy, including the judiciary, is another significant challenge faced by the Indian judicial system. Although the media often focuses on exposing corruption in the executive branch, instances of corruption within the judiciary receive less attention. The lack of an established system of accountability and the absence of provisions for registering an FIR against a judge without the permission of the Chief Justice of India contribute to the problem. The professional arrogance of judges, failure to do thorough research, and deviation from precedent or judicial principles further delay justice and undermine the integrity of the system. While efforts have been made to address corruption, such as the impeachment of a judge in 2011 for misappropriation of funds, more robust measures are needed to ensure transparency and accountability within the judiciary.

Lack of Transparency in the Appointment of Judges

Transparency in the appointment of judges has been a subject of debate in recent years. Both the existing collegium system and the proposed National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) have faced criticism for lacking transparency and clarity. The collegium system, in which judges appoint judges, has been criticized for its opacity, as it violates the right to information and does not allow for public scrutiny. The lack of transparency in the appointment process raises doubts about the fairness and integrity of the judiciary. While the government argues that the introduction of the NJAC would bring more transparency, the Supreme Court has expressed reservations about the proposed system, emphasizing the need for a higher level of law to govern judicial appointments. The issue of transparency in the appointment of judges remains a significant concern that needs to be addressed to enhance public trust in the judicial system.

Judicial Vacancies

The prevalence of judicial vacancies is a pressing concern within the Indian judicial system. The pendency of cases is closely tied to the unfilled vacancies, as the shortage of judges hampers the timely resolution of cases. As of now, there are 454 vacant positions for High Court judges across the country, out of a sanctioned strength of 1098 judges. The Supreme Court itself has eight vacancies out of a sanctioned strength of 34 judges. The lack of timely appointments has been a cause for crisis, prompting the government to expedite the appointment process. Efforts have also been made to promote diversity in judicial appointments, encouraging the appointment of judges from marginalized social backgrounds. However, more comprehensive measures are needed to address the issue of judicial vacancies and ensure the effective functioning of the judiciary.

Under Trials of the Accused

The plight of undertrial prisoners is another serious concern in the Indian judicial system. Many individuals who are awaiting trial spend a significant amount of time in jail, often exceeding the potential sentence they would receive if convicted. The classification of offenses into bailable and non-bailable categories exacerbates the problem, as those who cannot afford bail or are unaware of their fundamental rights suffer the most. The conditions in which undertrial prisoners are confined, coupled with the physical and psychological hardships they endure, raise questions about the fairness and efficiency of the judicial system. The inefficiency in aiding these undertrial prisoners for a speedy trial further exacerbates their suffering. Addressing this issue requires reforms that prioritize the prompt resolution of cases and ensure that individuals are not unjustly incarcerated for extended periods.

Lack of Information and Interaction Among People and Courts

For a judicial system to thrive, active participation and engagement from the public are essential. However, the lack of interaction between the courts and the general public hinders the transparency and accessibility of the judiciary. The law enforcement agencies and lawmakers must seek public opinion on specific laws and judgments to ensure that the system reflects the needs and concerns of the people. Additionally, reforms that promote public awareness and understanding of the judicial system would help foster trust and engagement. Embracing technological advancements and providing comprehensive information about court processes and judgments would enhance transparency and encourage public participation.

Reforms to be Made in the Working of the Judiciary

To address the flaws and challenges facing the Indian judicial system, several reformative measures can be implemented:

Switching to the Hybrid Mode

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the adoption of virtual court proceedings. However, the virtual mode has presented numerous obstacles. Switching to a hybrid mode, where one party appears via video conferencing and the other party appears in physical court, can help overcome these challenges and streamline court proceedings.

Increase in the Strength of Judges

The executive and legislative branches should prioritize filling judicial vacancies promptly. Establishing a system that expedites the appointment process and ensures timely appointments is crucial for reducing the backlog of cases and improving the efficiency of the judicial system. The appointment of judges should also prioritize diversity, representing various social backgrounds.

Strengthening the Disposal of Tribunals

Tribunal courts play a vital role in the judicial system. Strengthening the disposal of cases in tribunals requires systematic case hearings, time-fixation of cases within a specific timeframe, adequate infrastructure, and effective monitoring of case loads.

Establishment of Fast Track Courts

To expedite the resolution of cases, the establishment of fast track courts has been a successful initiative. Fast track courts should be established in all districts, prioritizing serious offenses such as those against children and women. These courts would ensure swift trials and prevent unnecessary harassment of the aggrieved parties.

Transparent Appointment of Judges

The appointment of judges should be carried out by a judicial commission comprising impartial individuals. The entire process should be transparent, allowing public scrutiny while respecting the privacy of judges. Transparency in the appointment process will enhance public trust in the judiciary.

Conclusion

While the Indian judicial system has a rich history and plays a vital role in upholding justice, it faces significant challenges and flaws. The pendency of cases, corruption, lack of transparency in appointments, judicial vacancies, undertrial prisoners, and limited interaction with the public are among the key issues that need to be addressed. Implementing reforms such as increasing the strength of judges, enhancing transparency, and establishing fast track courts can help alleviate these problems and strengthen the judicial system. By addressing these issues, the Indian judicial system can regain public trust and fulfill its crucial role in delivering justice.