why do you think Indian Judiciary requires criminal justice system
Answers
Answered by
0
Why is the Indian judicial system so sluggish?
Still have a question? Ask your own!
What is your question?
19 ANSWERS

Meenal Badki, studied at Maharashtra Institute Of Technology
Answered Jun 10, 2018
The answer to your question lies in Judicial reforms required in India. Now the why, how and when are the questions that might have followed in your mind, hence I am sharing some opinions/views based on the study I did with respect to the Indian judiciary. The recent news being about Judges appointment and putting the debate in political and historical context. Now, the justice system in our country is the principal instrument in upholding the undertakings of the Constitution. The citizen of the country has great trust in the impartiality of the judiciary, and it’s only fair that speedy justice is meted out to ensure rule of law and delivering good governance. Thus, judicial reforms must be at the top of the development agenda.
The current issues plaguing the inability of the system to keep pace with judicial overreach and judicial corruption and lack of accountability. Judicial ineffectiveness is also responsible for increased crimes, not to forget that seven of the twenty-four High Courts in the country are without a full-time Chief Justice.
Now, we can largely combine the issues plaguing the judiciary into three problems:
-Judicial backlog
The backlog of pending cases is 25.4 million cases as of Oct 2017 (as per NJDG data). Such backlog in the judiciary system results in the delay of justice, not to forget that it also results in lack of accessibility of justice to the average citizen. Now, the problem is that the bulk of the cases is trivial matters such as property disputes, theft, slap incidents etc.
Now, there is a clear lack of basic infrastructure in subordinate courts in Tier-II and Tier-III cities, and also, most of the work is still done in pen/paper format, through the minuscule staff that each Judge is given. The solution to this is more investment needed on a priority basis in the judiciary.
This also means that there should be a large number of the inception of Nyaya Panchayats, Nyaya Samitis, Lok Adalats which will serve as Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism in rural and urban areas (as mandated by the Nyaya Panchayat Act, 2009 and suggested by Article 39A of the Constitution). Courts must exhort for out-of-court settlements in petty disputes, and also, the bulk of the cases plaguing institutionalized judiciary can be shifted to NPs and NSs, thus, relieving them of burden. A separate litigation policy should look into the matter that frivolous cases aren’t seen by higher courts, by the aforementioned ADRs.
Also, in my opinion, there must be some sort of restrictions on infinite appeals, and only cases of national importance, or having a complex issue underneath, must reach the Supreme Court. Majority of the cases must be disposed of by the High Court’s themselves.
Furthermore, there must be at least 2-3 High Court benches in the state, taking care of certain geographical area under their control, and there should be 5 Supreme Court benches in the country, taking care of North, West, South, East, North-East of the country cases. This would mean more judges and more disposals of cases. A separate, permanent Constitutional Bench must be formed to look for specific cases pertaining to Constitution and it’s understanding.
Hope this answer helps you out and please follow me and mark me as brainliest too
:) :) :) :) :)
Still have a question? Ask your own!
What is your question?
19 ANSWERS

Meenal Badki, studied at Maharashtra Institute Of Technology
Answered Jun 10, 2018
The answer to your question lies in Judicial reforms required in India. Now the why, how and when are the questions that might have followed in your mind, hence I am sharing some opinions/views based on the study I did with respect to the Indian judiciary. The recent news being about Judges appointment and putting the debate in political and historical context. Now, the justice system in our country is the principal instrument in upholding the undertakings of the Constitution. The citizen of the country has great trust in the impartiality of the judiciary, and it’s only fair that speedy justice is meted out to ensure rule of law and delivering good governance. Thus, judicial reforms must be at the top of the development agenda.
The current issues plaguing the inability of the system to keep pace with judicial overreach and judicial corruption and lack of accountability. Judicial ineffectiveness is also responsible for increased crimes, not to forget that seven of the twenty-four High Courts in the country are without a full-time Chief Justice.
Now, we can largely combine the issues plaguing the judiciary into three problems:
-Judicial backlog
The backlog of pending cases is 25.4 million cases as of Oct 2017 (as per NJDG data). Such backlog in the judiciary system results in the delay of justice, not to forget that it also results in lack of accessibility of justice to the average citizen. Now, the problem is that the bulk of the cases is trivial matters such as property disputes, theft, slap incidents etc.
Now, there is a clear lack of basic infrastructure in subordinate courts in Tier-II and Tier-III cities, and also, most of the work is still done in pen/paper format, through the minuscule staff that each Judge is given. The solution to this is more investment needed on a priority basis in the judiciary.
This also means that there should be a large number of the inception of Nyaya Panchayats, Nyaya Samitis, Lok Adalats which will serve as Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism in rural and urban areas (as mandated by the Nyaya Panchayat Act, 2009 and suggested by Article 39A of the Constitution). Courts must exhort for out-of-court settlements in petty disputes, and also, the bulk of the cases plaguing institutionalized judiciary can be shifted to NPs and NSs, thus, relieving them of burden. A separate litigation policy should look into the matter that frivolous cases aren’t seen by higher courts, by the aforementioned ADRs.
Also, in my opinion, there must be some sort of restrictions on infinite appeals, and only cases of national importance, or having a complex issue underneath, must reach the Supreme Court. Majority of the cases must be disposed of by the High Court’s themselves.
Furthermore, there must be at least 2-3 High Court benches in the state, taking care of certain geographical area under their control, and there should be 5 Supreme Court benches in the country, taking care of North, West, South, East, North-East of the country cases. This would mean more judges and more disposals of cases. A separate, permanent Constitutional Bench must be formed to look for specific cases pertaining to Constitution and it’s understanding.
Hope this answer helps you out and please follow me and mark me as brainliest too
:) :) :) :) :)
Similar questions