Improving the administration of justice

New Delhi: Under the current regime of the Centre, there are ongoing efforts to restrict the issuance of justice for the common man.

Initiatives have been taken aimed mainly at a comprehensive revision of the laws, reform of the investigation process by emphasizing the importance of forensics and introducing digitalization and related technologies to reduce delays.

Numerous amendments have been made to the IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act with the dual aim of strengthening the “deterrent effect” of punishments against crimes while “putting citizens and their dignity first”.

Delays in the various stages of the judicial process – including investigation, prosecution and trial – are to be minimised by setting deadlines for the filing of chargesheets, allowing video recording of evidence and encouraging early judgment by avoiding unnecessary adjournments.

Of course, the new laws and the method of their implementation had to be explained to all interested parties, and the Centre rightly instructed the leading police training institutions to include appropriate new guidelines in their programmes.

The enormous expansion of forensic capabilities of investigators today represents an important challenge that is being systematically addressed.

Timely dispensation of justice is fundamental to the stability of a democratic state. It is therefore gratifying that the central government is making a comprehensive attempt to address this as a cornerstone of governance. The outcome of these transformational measures has been eagerly awaited.

At the 44th All India Criminology Conference held at the National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU) in Gandhinagar in January 2024, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said that Parliament had already passed new penal codes in December 2023 to replace the 150-year-old IPC, CrPC and the Evidence Act. This would abolish laws of colonial origin, create new laws for timely administration of justice and ensure that technology is used to increase the conviction rate.

He announced that it has become mandatory for a forensic expert to visit the crime scene of crimes punishable with imprisonment of seven years or more. He announced that the Central government is giving priority to the growing menace of cybercrime and therefore has set up the Indian Cyber ​​Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) to augment cybersecurity infrastructure and launch nationwide campaigns to create public awareness about cybersecurity issues.

No fewer than 313 amendments were made to the old penal codes to respond to changing social and political trends, based on the principle that legal frameworks were created for society and must adapt to its contemporary needs for justice.

Some important provisions of the new laws are aimed directly at reducing delays in the administration of justice. No case will normally take more than three years – from the initiation of criminal proceedings to the pronouncement of a verdict by the court of first instance.

The time limit for filing the chargesheet is 90 days, which can be extended by another 90 days by the court. This means that a maximum of 120 days can elapse between the FIR and the filing of the chargesheet.

The amendments to the law emphasize the rights of the accused, introduce special provisions to protect women and children, and seek to prevent the abuse of police powers. The police are required to inform a complainant of the status of the investigation after 90 days from the complaint and every 15 days thereafter.

Judges must deliver their verdict within 30 days of the conclusion of the pleadings and the verdict should be available online within seven days of the verdict being delivered.

No government can quash a case against a prison sentence of seven years or more without hearing the victim. Prime Minister Modi’s government has introduced stringent laws to curb sexual crimes against women and children.

The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 provides for the death penalty for the rape of a girl under 12 years of age, with a minimum sentence of 20 years – extendable to life imprisonment in the case of the rape of a girl under 16 years of age.

The minimum sentence for raping a woman has been increased from seven to ten years, which can be extended to life imprisonment. The new laws require courts to issue orders based on the investigator’s recommendations.

The concept of trial in absentia was introduced to ensure that fugitives could be tried and convicted even when they were not in the country. In addition, crimes such as lynching, terrorism, armed insurrection and secessionism were defined and provision was made for confiscation of the property of such offenders.

The Police Force Modernisation Programme (MPF) includes training programmes designed to promote good police-public relations and strengthen public confidence in law enforcement agencies.

The center has set itself the goal of achieving a 90 percent conviction rate. Overall, creating a deterrent to crimes that lead to the destabilization of society is a welcome step.

A fundamental problem in the administration of law and order is that, under the Constitution, it is entirely the responsibility of the states and the central government has no power to exercise any supervisory function except in cases where law and order has completely broken down, thereby paving the way for central government intervention.

Political interference in police work, professionally incompetent officers who attain high positions through nepotism, and police stations that do not project a positive image in the eyes of law-abiding citizens – these are the main systemic reasons why India has failed to achieve uniform law enforcement and order maintenance across the country.

If the new criminal laws were implemented without being obstructed by political self-interest and if the police leadership ensured that the concept of policing as a citizen-oriented state function was also widely understood, things would certainly improve.

Giving the Central Government a say, however indirectly, in the appointment of the Chief Secretary and the State DGP through the UPSC would go a long way in improving the standards of law and order administration and ensuring justice to the people. The Supreme Court of India has had occasion to disapprove of the trend of State Governments appointing ‘acting DGPs’ for political reasons and to lay down the general procedure for selecting a regular DGP.

It is not clear how the central government took advantage of the Supreme Court’s support to improve policing in the states.

At the recent Diamond Jubilee celebrations of the Supreme Court, both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud spoke about the need to make the justice system more accessible to the common people.

The Prime Minister stressed the importance of “simplicity of justice”, described the Supreme Court as the most important instrument for ensuring this and presented it as a right of every Indian citizen.

He recalled that there are 440 million cases pending in the district courts alone and recommended greater use of technology to reduce the number of pending cases. He wanted crimes against women to be dealt with quickly to give them greater security and pointed out that stricter laws have been enacted to prosecute crimes against women and children.

He expressed confidence that the e-Court project and digitization would speed up the administration of justice and urged the Supreme Court to ensure that district judges were adequately trained in this regard.

India’s Chief Justice Chandrachud stressed the fundamental points that “justice must be dispensed free from social and political pressure”, that a verdict should be above “inherent human biases” and that “the judiciary plays a crucial role in upholding democratic values”.

He noted that the Supreme Court was created on an idealistic principle – to interpret legal questions in accordance with the rule of law rather than colonial values ​​or societal hierarchies – and added that the judiciary should serve as a bulwark against injustice, tyranny and arbitrariness.

He considered the right to speedy justice as a fundamental right of citizens and added that the Supreme Court has taken proactive measures to reduce the duration of pendency of cases.

Meanwhile, the new Law Commission, which will begin work in September, has been given the task, among other things, of “creating a framework for the effective management of judicial proceedings in order to avoid delays and clear the backlog”.

It is encouraging that the government and the judiciary are addressing the issue of speedy justice at the highest level.