Context
Recently, the Bombay High Court has acquitted all 12 men previously convicted in the Mumbai Train Blast Case (2006), citing a complete failure by the prosecution to prove their guilt.
It has resurfaced debate over the sanctity and competency of India’s criminal justice system, and questions the cumulative ability to ensure justice to the victims of dire acts.
Criminal Justice System in India
India’s criminal justice system is struggling with a huge backlog, raising grave concerns about competency to deliver timely justice and institutional efficiency.
(i) Pending Cases:
(a) 58.4 million cases pending across Indian courts (As of August 2024); About 80% of these are criminal cases. Over 1 lakh cases are stuck in appellate courts.
(b) Only about 60% of cases are resolved annually, with the remaining 40% adding to the backlog.
(c) National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG): 10% of cases have been pending for over 10 years. 32% are less than a year old, but delays begin early.
(ii) Conviction & Acquittal Rates in India:
(a) According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), the Conviction Rate in 2022 came to 54.2%, down from 57% in 2021. But, Historical Average (2000–2022) is around 42.5%, with a peak of 59.2% in 2020.
Issues in India’s Criminal Justice System
(i) Police and Investigation:
(a) Under-Resourced and Overburdened Police: Inadequate manpower, poor training, and poor scientific investigation techniques hamper quick and effective crime detection and prosecution.
(b) Lack of Forensic Infrastructure: Dependency on confessional statements and poor preservation of evidence most of the time fail to meet judicial scrutiny.
(c) Political Interference: Regular transfers and devoid of professional autonomy erode the impartiality and morale of investigating officers.
(ii) Prosecution and Judiciary:
(a) Weak Prosecution: Prosecutors are mostly ill-trained, overburdened with work, and lack independence and autonomy to deal with cases effectively.
(b) Judicial Delays: Huge case backlogs (more than fifty million cases pending) lead to prolonged trials, frequent adjournments, and delayed justice.
(c) Quality of Legal Aid: The poor and marginalized, unable to afford quality defense, often face systemic disadvantage.
(iii) Detention, Bail, and Undertrial Population:
(a) High Number of Undertrials: One third of total prisoners are undertrials—many imprisoned for longer than maximum sentences for alleged offenses.
(b) Stringent Bail Provisions: Especially under special laws (e.g., UAPA, TADA), bail is difficult, leading to prolonged incarceration without conviction.
(iv) Terrorism and Special Laws:
(a) Extraordinary Laws, Ordinary Problems: Though laws like UAPA aim for robust action against terrorism, their misuse and blunders in evidence gathering have led to unjustified convictions and actual offenders escaping justice.
Reforms or Suggestions
(i) Commissions and Reports: Multiple reports (Malimath Committee 2003, Law Commission, etc.) have asked for reforms—making robust police autonomy, case management, victim compensation, and tech adoption.
(ii) Legislative Efforts: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (Replaces the Indian Penal Code, 1860); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 – Replaces the Code of Criminal Procedure; Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023 – Replaces the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
(iii) These define contemporary crimes like mob lynching, organized crime, and cyber attacks. Also, make sexual offenses gender-neutral, and bring community service as punishment for minor crimes.
(iv) Judicial Directives: The Supreme Court has also stated that police reforms, speedy trials, legal aid enhancement, and prison decongestion are the need of the hour.
Way Ahead
(i) Strengthening Police and Investigation:
(a) Scientific Methods: Invest in forensic labs, recruit technical staff, and encourage digital evidence use. (b) Autonomy and Accountability: Separate police appointments from political interference, fix tenures, and introduce autonomous oversight authorities.
(ii) Revamping Prosecution and Legal Aid:
(a) Independent Prosecution Service: Detach from executive influence, well-trained, and adequately staffed.
(b) Quality Legal Aid: Make the National Legal Services Authority more robust, and ensure competent representation for the indigent.
(iii) Judicial Efficiency:
(a) Case Management Systems: Leverage technology for e-courts, smart scheduling, and paperless proceedings.
(b) Specialized Courts: Fast-track and special courts for terror, sexual violence, and economic offenses.
(c) Judicial Vacancies: Fill vacancies at all levels and train judges in complicated legislation (e.g., cyber, terrorism, and white-collar crimes).
- Empowering Tribal Communities in India: Initiatives and Challenges
- India’s Startup Ecosystem: A Report by Meta
- Significance of India’s Upcoming Census
- List of Top 5 NDA Coaching in India | Best NDA Coaching in India
(iv) Undertrial Reforms:
(a) Bail Reforms: Make bail the norm and jail the rare, specifically for non-violent offenses.
(b) Periodic Review: Order regular judicial review of undertrials.
(v) Safeguarding Rights While Fighting Terrorism:
(a) Balance Security and Liberty: Ensure preventive detention and anti-terror laws are utilised with utmost and robust safeguards to check any misuse.
Conclusion
Criminal Justice System in India is currently in a state of uncertainty and is highly unpopular due to its inefficiency. The reforms are the most important need of the hour. The government needs to draft a clear policy that can inform changes in the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedures. The reforms should not only make the system more efficient but also be sensitive to both the innocent and the officers who are enforcing laws.