DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTION- INDIAN JUDICIARY
We must painfully admit that our legal system has become notorious for its delay and expense.
In the first place, the delay breeds litigation. Many litigants come to court with unsustainable causes in the hope of extracting something from the other side by abusing our time consuming process. Secondly, the delay introduces frustration which soon results in disgust for the legal system. This has negative effect since it leaves a brooding sense of injustice which has occasionally manifested in disrespect for the courts.
In the first place the main reason for the docket explosion is lack of judicial manpower planning. No systematic or scientific study has been made in this behalf. The 120th Report of Law Commission has pointed out the low judge ratio vis-à-vis population in India as compared to the other countries. The body recommended that the existing ratio of 10.5 judges per every million Indians should be raised to at least 50 judges. But even this report has not studied the percentage of litigation increase since independence.
Secondly, the delay in the disposal of cases breeds frivolous litigation. This can entirely be checked and controlled by the Bar if such litigation is discouraged. Generally the members of the Bar try to excuse themselves on the specious plea that even such cases at times get admitted. Such stray instances should not be projected for not doing that which it is the duty of every member of the Bar to do.
Thirdly, there is general feeling amongst the litigants that cases are adjourned to accommodate the lawyers. This feeling has now received statutory recognition by the amendment made in Order 17 rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure. Even after this amendment it is common experience that hearings are frequently adjourned on account of the non-availability lawyers for one or other reason. Frequent adjournments scare away witnesses and generate a feeling of disgust in the litigants for the system. It is also common experience that the members of the Bar do not adhere to the various stages fixed under the civil procedure code for the trial of the suits. In the name of substantial justice we have bypassed the course charted out by the code for the trial of cases. Yet we say that the system has failed when in fact we have failed the system. If the trial of the cases proceed from day to day as envisaged by the code, witnesses will be willing to attend, prolixity in evidence and arguments will be avoided and there will be an all round appreciation and satisfaction for the system.
The decline in the prestige and image of the legal profession should be a cause for concern to everyone connected with the justice delivery system and it is high time that we take a hard look at where we have faltered and make a serious effort to repair the damage by taking corrective action. The profession has withstood onslaughts from eminent personalities.
“WE MUST ENSURE THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE PROFESSION DO NOT DESCEND TO LEVELES WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT ITS REPUTATION AND DIGNITY.”
The Members of the legal profession are being blamed even by our elected representatives for the inordinate delay in the disposal of the cases. That is why of late tendency to exclude lawyers from the adjudicatory process noticed.

Atalji Prime Minister of India

SCHOOL ALBUM