|
Dear Chandan
*****These things could be considered only if case is heard, guilt is
established....
You're right. But cases are heard fairly by the courts once they are
brought before the judges. I have not heard any criticism on this score. As
regards trial delays, I discussed the subject before.
*****More so in an environment of complete lack of accountability and an
absence of due process could reliably be sought.
I am not claiming that the system is perfect. First judges have discretion
in sentencing a convict. Say in a rape case, where the maximum punishment could
be 7 years (I do not have a law book to verify it), the judge can dispense a
smaller dose according to his discretion.The judiciary in India, despite your
apphrension, on the whole functions efficiently and fairly. One of the reasons
for this is the vast network of legal reporting in the English-speaking world.
The juges' work is scrutinised world over and we benefit from other
Anglo-American precedents as well. India is a big country and the judiciary is
integrated throughout India. The judgments of the High Courts
as well as the Supreme Court are under the microscope of the legal luminaries
every hour of the day. So far as lower courts are concerned, their work is
supervised strictly by the High Courts.
Where is the loophole then? I cannot answer this question properly as I am
not in touch with existing laws and also how the system is in operation
today. Broadly the prosecution may not present certain cases to the
Courts, say cases where Ministers are involved or even withhold evidence as the
State is the custodian of records. In reality, especially as members of
the public can themselves sue any private individual, however, powerful and
the State itself, the situation is not so bad. As I said earlier there were many
cases against Ministers and big shots (Remember the Harlalka case attempting to
rob the insurance companies soon after independence?) since 1950.
Because of the judiciary's openness there is little need of accountability
on the part of the executive in regard to dispensation of justice except the
responsibility to find the money to meet the rising expenditure of the courts
and obviously that includes such matters as appointment of judges at all levels,
arrange local hearings (circuits) and so on.
Recently a case of irregularities in the appointment of a large number
of constables was tried by the Guwahati High Court. I think the matter
is sub judice. There were several other cases of public interest. I think
general poverty stops peple from going to the courts for the redress of their
grievances.
I hope you'll now accept that the due process of law or the rule of law as
it is termed in UK has remained in tact at least for the purpose of our
discussion here.
|
_______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [email protected] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
Mailing list FAQ: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html To unsubscribe or change options: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
