Judgment after 35 yrs

Last week, the Supreme Court decided a case that started in 1955 in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, over a will that went on for 65 years at various levels of the hierarchy of courts. Another telling example of the snail-paced Indian judicial system, an aberration that has got institutionalised, is the verdict delivered by a Mathura court. Eleven former Rajasthan policemen have been convicted and given life sentence for gunning down Raja Man Singh of Bharatpur and two colleagues in Deeg area in 1985. The case was first heard in a Rajasthan court but got shifted to Uttar Pradesh on instructions from the Supreme Court. It took more than 1,700 hearings and 35 years for a judgment to be pronounced. Shiv Charan Mathur, the Congress Chief Minister, incidentally had to resign within days of the killings.

A staggering 60,000-plus cases are pending in the apex court itself, 44 lakh in high courts. When cases take two to three decades to be settled, public confidence in the efficacy of the judicial system, routinely described as broken, is bound to be low. Ironically, despite the long-winding and stressful process, the hope that justice will one day be delivered has not ebbed. Much could have been done to build on this faith. There is still ample opportunity for courts to set the house in order. If fast-track courts are possible, so is a serious relook at suggestions such as tweaking working hours, coming down hard on frivolous petitions, discouraging government litigation, encouraging settlement and term-bound handling of election-related complaints. Particular attention is needed to put a cap on appeals and adjournments.

Vikas Dubey getting bail despite several cases registered against him was termed a failure of the institution by the apex court, which while hearing a petition on the gangster’s encounter told the UP Government to uphold the law. The rule of law is the only acceptable way, but so is the law taking its own course without delay.