A leading legal expert recently pointed out a few serious drawbacks of the Indian judiciary as per the top 10 breaking news in India in Hindi today. He said that petitioners hiring the highest-paid lawyers easily get a hearing at the court while others hiring lawyers who charge less, struggle to get a hearing. The legal expert specifically mentioned the case of fake civil rights activist, Teesta Setalvad, facing serious charges of falsifying evidence against prime minister Modi in the Gujarat Riots case.
He said that Setalvad’s case was heard by the Supreme Court on a holiday after the Gujarat High Court rejected her bail plea because of the seriousness of the charges and the quality of evidence against her.
A three-judge bench led by justice BR Gavai, which heard the Setalvad case observed that “heavens won’t fall if the interim protection is granted” as per the latest samachar in Hindi. The judges did not consider any provision of the constitution and gave their own personal judgment in the case.
There is very little doubt in anybody’s mind that the judges who granted interim bail to Delhi chief minister, Arvind Kejriwal in the Delhi Liquor Scam case, had considered the Setalvad case as a precedent and sidelined constitutional provisions.
While allowing a 21-day interim bail to Kejriwal, which is technically a parole, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, one of the two judges of the bench hearing Kejriwal’s bail petition, said “21 days here and there would not make a difference.”
Judges cannot be allowed to make a mockery of law
When judges of the Supreme Court make decisions that are not permissible under the provision of the constitution of India, it is nothing less than a constitutional crisis in the country.
People like Setalvad and Kejriwal, who are facing serious criminal charges with loads of high-quality evidence against them cannot be given parole under the guise of “Interim bail”.
When judges make statements like “heavens won’t fall if the interim protection is granted” or “21 days here and there would not make a difference”, while giving interim bail to people facing serious criminal charges, it is a serious problem.
The union government has taken serious exception to such judicial overreach according to the top 10 breaking news in India in Hindi today.
Why do expensive lawyers get a hearing almost at will?
Most people in high places facing serious criminal charges backed by high quality evidence somehow manage to hire the most expensive lawyers in the country.
Such lawyers manage to skip the long queue of pending cases and get a hearing from the Supreme Court as per top 10 breaking news in India in Hindi today.
As already stated, Setalvad’s petition was heard on a holiday and there are cases handled by such high-flying lawyers that are heard at odd hours.
One such case involving a known criminal facing charges of terrorism backed by quality evidence was heard in the middle of the night. It is another matter that his plea for stay in death row was rejected but why was the court opened in the middle of the night for this terrorist? Will an ordinary citizen who pays a few thousands of rupees to his lawyer as fees, get this benefit? Today the higher judiciary in India is more of a problem than a solution for the country’s criminal justice system.
ChatGPT
The Indian judicial system, touted as the guardian of justice and the pillar of democracy, often falls short in the eyes of many ordinary Indians. Despite its foundational principles of equality before the law and fair trials, there are several reasons why a significant portion of the population feels let down by it.
One of the primary grievances is the snail-paced nature of justice delivery. Cases often linger in courts for years, if not decades, leaving litigants exhausted and disillusioned. The backlog of cases is staggering, with millions pending in various courts across the country. This delay not only undermines the faith in the system but also hampers access to justice, particularly for the underprivileged who cannot afford prolonged legal battles.
Additionally, there is a widespread perception of corruption within the judiciary. While the majority of judges may uphold integrity, instances of bribery, favoritism, and political interference tarnish the institution’s credibility. For ordinary citizens, navigating the legal maze becomes daunting when they perceive that outcomes may be influenced by factors other than merit or evidence.
Furthermore, the complexity and archaic procedures of the legal system act as deterrents for many. Legal proceedings are often conducted in convoluted language and require extensive documentation, making it inaccessible to those without legal expertise or resources. This alienates a large section of society, especially rural and marginalized communities, who are unable to assert their rights effectively.
Another significant issue is the lack of transparency and accountability in the functioning of the judiciary. While judicial decisions are meant to be impartial and based on the rule of law, there have been instances where judgments appear arbitrary or biased. The opacity surrounding judicial appointments and disciplinary actions further erodes public trust and raises questions about the system’s independence.
Moreover, the socio-economic disparities prevalent in Indian society are reflected in the justice system. Marginalized groups, including Dalits, minorities, and women, often face discrimination and prejudice, both within the legal framework and in societal attitudes. Instances of judicial insensitivity or negligence towards their plight reinforce feelings of marginalization and injustice.
In conclusion, while the Indian judicial system embodies the ideals of justice and equality, its practical manifestation often falls short of expectations. The challenges of delay, corruption, complexity, lack of transparency, and social biases contribute to a pervasive sense of disillusionment among ordinary Indians. Addressing these issues requires concerted efforts towards reforming institutional practices, enhancing accountability, and ensuring equal access to justice for all citizens.