Court: Infrastructural development essential for speedy justice

Court: In 2016, the then Chief Justice of India Justice T.S. Thakur became emotional while discussing pending cases in the court, vacant posts of judges and infrastructure issues. He said that due to all the problems, the confidence of the people in the country's judiciary is badly affected. Similarly, former Chief Justice of India N. In October 2021, at the inauguration of Bombay High Court's Aurangabad Bench Annex Building, V. Ramanna said, “The need for good infrastructure in Indian courts has always been a thought in our minds. Because of this mentality, even today the courts of our country are functioning from old and dilapidated buildings. In such a situation the courts have to face many difficulties in performing their duties effectively. Court turns out of common man's reach: Researcher Shishir Tripathi in his book “Stalled Wheels of Justice” mentions the reasons why the common man is so troubled. According to the author, the court has become very expensive. Unofficially, an MP has to spend between Rs 50 and 100 crores to contest the elections, and similarly, it costs between Rs 10 and 20 lakhs to appear before a large advocate court. From this we can estimate how expensive our democracy and justice system is. How can the common man get justice in this? The main reason for all this is underdevelopment of judicial infrastructure. If the work is carried out seriously, the situation can be changed soon. Over four crore pending cases: According to the National Judicial Data Grid (NJTG), the number of pending cases in various courts across the country today has crossed four crore 50 lakh. In 2023, 93220 cases were pending for 30 years. Whereas the number of cases pending for 20 to 30 years is four lakh 95 thousand two hundred and fifty seven. Also, 5 lakh 88 thousand 477 people have spent half their lives in prisons awaiting justice. Out of which 33726601 cases are criminal cases and 10977331 cases are civil cases. The number of cases pending for more than 10 years is 3230452. The main reason for pending cases is shortage of judges and lack of basic facilities in court. A major reason for the underdevelopment of judicial infrastructure is their own logic about the role of the Center and the States. The present government has done a lot of work in this direction, funds are being sent by the central government and allocations have been increased, but still there is severe lack of facilities in lower courts and trial courts. According to the National Judicial Infrastructure Institute (NJIC), only 27 percent of trial courts are computerized. There is no women's toilet, clean drinking water, medical facility, accommodation etc. in the court room. Waiting for justice takes years: Mentioning some cases, the author has said that one case, state of Bihar, is a civil case. On August 5, 1967, Banaras Cha of Sitamari filed a title suit regarding his claim over six ghattas of land. The case continued in the trial court for 19 years. The trial court dismissed the case in 1986. He then appealed to the lower court challenging the judgment of the trial court. The lower appellate court on this appeal gave judgment in 1988 in favor of the plaintiff Banaras Cha. Heirs of respondent Krishna Kant Prasad filed suit in Patna High Court. A single bench of the Patna High Court, in its judgment in 1989, dismissed the appeal. Pronouncing the order, the judge said that the findings of the first appellate court were correct and no major question of law arose. Subsequently, Krishnakanth Prasad's successor filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court. The case had been going on in the Supreme Court for 11 years, and then the Supreme Court declared the Patna High Court judgment invalid. The Supreme Court held that the judgment of the High Court was not correct. Because it was a very serious dispute over the ownership of the land. Whereas the High Court held that land disputes are more general. By the Supreme Court's order dated February 23, 2000, the High Court ordered a retrial of the case. The High Court heard the matter and dismissed the second appeal after 9 years in August 2009. Following this, the defendant filed a case in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, taking into account the evidence on record, found that the plaintiff was not the owner of the said property when it filed the suit on 5th August, 1967 regarding the title and possession of the plaintiff. That property is also not in his possession. Before the plaintiff filed this suit, i.e., since 1958, the defendant was in possession of this land and they have evidence of that. Therefore, only the heirs of Krishnakanth Prasad have the right in the land. This case went on for 54 years and when the verdict came, not only the plaintiff, the defendant, but no one from that generation was allowed to hear the verdict. While he spent 54 years in jail without facing trial: Similarly, Machal Lalung, a member of the Lalung tribe of Assam's Morigan, spent 54 years in an Indian jail without facing trial. He was arrested in 1951 on charges of “causing serious harm” and transferred to a mental institution in Tezpur, where he was forgotten. He was only 23 years old when the allegations were made against him. The case went untried for 54 years and he was 77 when he came out of jail. In a similar case Umakant Mishra from Kanpur was 65 years old when he was acquitted by a court of theft at the age of 29. Lakhs of such cases are pending in court. If the judicial infrastructure is not developed in time, the matter may escalate. The post Court: Infrastructure development is essential for speedy justice appeared first on Prabhat Khabar.