In a discussion on judicial delays in India, Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra highlighted the pressing need for reform, echoing President Murmu’s recent call for action. Referring to the persistent issue as “Taarikh Pe Taarikh,” Luthra emphasized the impact of prolonged legal proceedings on justice delivery. She urged for immediate steps to address the inefficiencies within the judicial system to ensure timely justice for all.
New Delhi: In response to President Droupadi Murmu’s recent remarks expressing concerns about judicial delays, senior Supreme Court advocate Geeta Luthra provided a thoughtful analysis of the issue.
Luthra highlighted the significance of the President’s comments, noting,
“The President’s remark is very interesting, I am relying on 2 judgments both by Supreme Court…where they are saying that speed is very significant; the same principle of justice delayed is justice denied.”
Luthra highlighted the importance of timely justice, citing specific cases where delays in the legal process were particularly egregious.
She pointed out,
“So, if a chargesheet is not filed, in one of the cases it was 4 years and in the other, it was 17 years. So, according to me, the first thing is there has to be some statute of limitation in criminal cases. You can’t have them ad infinitum continuing…There has to be some stopping, this is my first point.”
She elaborated on the consequences of such delays, emphasizing that prolonged legal proceedings not only burden the accused but also reflect a lack of seriousness on the part of the state.
She explained,
“A lot of litigations will get away. Second, accused will not have evidence if you file a chargesheet so late because he does not know the material against him. Third, the state is clearly not serious if it’s filing something after several years,”
Luthra interpreted the President’s remarks as a call for both speed and effectiveness in the justice system.
She remarked,
“I think President probably has said that to the extent that we need quick justice, while we need quick justice, we also need a very effective justice.”
She illustrated this with a case from Rajasthan that had shocked even the Supreme Court, where a rape trial concluded in just seven days.
She noted,
“You can’t do that, that man will go in for life. You have to give him an opportunity and remember, in India, you often don’t get bail,”
Furthermore, Luthra observed that the judiciary is becoming more cautious in granting adjournments, recognizing the impact on the overall justice system.
She said,
“Courts now are very careful in granting adjournments…So, if 30 cases get adjourned, it will be justice for the other 40,”
However, she also called for improvements in the legal process, suggesting that better preparation by both lawyers and judges could significantly enhance efficiency.
She added,
“But to some extent, I think, some lawyers and judges need to read their files well,”
Luthra emphasized the need for a more robust legal infrastructure, particularly in terms of administrative support.
She argued,
“The moment you have a good secretariat, half the job of the lawyer and judge is done. We don’t need necessarily more judges. We need better secretariat, trained staff, so pleadings and all those things are taken care of,”
In conclusion, Luthra expressed appreciation for President Murmu’s focus on this critical issue, stating,
“We can only appreciate that she is looking into this issue…”
Her comments underscore the ongoing challenges in the Indian judicial system and the importance of addressing both speed and effectiveness to ensure justice is served.
President Droupadi Murmu raised significant concerns about the delays plaguing the Indian judicial system. Her remarks sparked a crucial discussion among legal experts, with senior Supreme Court advocate Geeta Luthra offering a compelling analysis of the issue. Luthra’s insights highlight the critical need for reform in how the Indian judiciary handles cases, emphasizing that both speed and effectiveness are essential to ensuring justice is truly served.
The Importance of Timely Justice
Advocate Geeta Luthra strongly supports President Murmu’s concerns, pointing out that judicial delays have long been a pressing issue in India. Luthra references two Supreme Court judgments to highlights her point,
“The President’s remark is very interesting, I am relying on 2 judgments both by Supreme Court…where they are saying that speed is very significant; the same principle of justice delayed is justice denied.”
Luthra brings attention to extreme cases where delays have been particularly egregious.
She notes,
“So, if a chargesheet is not filed, in one of the cases it was 4 years and in the other, it was 17 years. So, according to me, the first thing is there has to be some statute of limitation in criminal cases. You can’t have them ad infinitum continuing. There has to be some stopping, this is my first point.”
Her argument is clear without a statute of limitations, cases can drag on indefinitely, leading to a situation where justice is effectively denied.
The Consequences of Judicial Delays
Luthra also elaborates on the broader consequences of prolonged legal proceedings. She emphasizes that such delays not only burden the accused but also indicate a lack of seriousness on the part of the state.
She explains,
“A lot of litigations will get away. Second, accused will not have evidence if you file a chargesheet so late because he does not know the material against him. Third, the state is clearly not serious if it’s filing something after several years,”
These delays can erode public confidence in the justice system and undermine the rule of law.
Balancing Speed with Effectiveness
While advocating for quicker resolutions, Luthra cautions against sacrificing the quality of justice in the process. She cites a case from Rajasthan, where a rape trial was concluded in just seven days, raising concerns about the fairness of such a rushed process.
She notes,
“You can’t do that, that man will go in for life. You have to give him an opportunity and remember, in India, you often don’t get bail,”
This example highlights the need for a balanced approach that ensures both the efficiency and integrity of judicial proceedings.
Judicial Practices and the Need for Reform
Luthra acknowledges that the judiciary is becoming more careful in granting adjournments, a positive development that could reduce unnecessary delays.
She observes,
“Courts now are very careful in granting adjournments…So, if 30 cases get adjourned, it will be justice for the other 40,”
However, she also calls for improvements in legal processes, suggesting that better preparation by both lawyers and judges could significantly enhance efficiency.
She adds,
“But to some extent, I think, some lawyers and judges need to read their files well,”
The Role of Legal Infrastructure
One of the key points Luthra raises is the need for a more robust legal infrastructure, particularly in terms of administrative support.
She argues,
“The moment you have a good secretariat, half the job of the lawyer and judge is done. We don’t need necessarily more judges. We need better secretariat, trained staff, so pleadings and all those things are taken care of,”
By improving the administrative backbone of the judiciary, the system can function more smoothly, reducing delays and ensuring that cases are handled more efficiently.
Conclusion: A Call for Comprehensive Judicial Reform
In conclusion, Geeta Luthra’s analysis not only supports President Murmu’s call for addressing judicial delays but also offers practical solutions to improve the system. By advocating for both speed and effectiveness in the judicial process, Luthra highlights the need for a balanced approach that ensures justice is served in a timely and fair manner. Her emphasis on improving legal infrastructure, enforcing a statute of limitations, and ensuring better case management reflects a comprehensive strategy to tackle the ongoing challenges within the Indian judicial system.
As India continues to grapple with the issue of judicial delays, the insights provided by Luthra and echoed by President Murmu offer a roadmap for much-needed reform. Addressing these challenges is not just about speeding up the process; it’s about ensuring that the justice system remains effective, fair, and accessible to all.