Overdue for Judicial system to be efficient and respectable! (A case of India)
-Dr. Abdul Ruff
Law is not meant to be mishandled and mutilated by lawyers the way they want because they want to mint money in courts by all means.
Judiciary is not cricket and justice cannot be delivered in a match fixing mode practiced in cricket matches. In cricket, bowlers and fielders jointly offer 50, 100, and 200 etc score to the “needy: batboys on prior agreement between the cricket boards and corporate mafias and obviously on huge payment basis. But Judiciary cannot function like hired fixing agents in as in cricket.
For the people, Judges are honest people.
Judges cannot but be honest people to raise the trust of the society in laws. By misbehaving, judges bring down the prestige and status of judiciary as vanguard of truthful justice system.
Judiciary of a nation is the ultimate hope of people and therefore has a big responsibility as it should guide the nation honestly and with distinction. It judgments should strengthen and make the system function much better than that exists.
Unfortunately, global judicial system is corrupt and causes faulty judgments and suspicions in the public mind. One gets the impression- rightly so- that money can buy favorable judgments from honorable judges. That is devastatingly horrible thing to happen to judiciary. The result is judiciary and judgments, like any other domains, are controlled by mafia and frauds in and around courts.
Unfortunately, India is a top corrupt nation with faulty, corrupt system, developed by government after government, catering for the welfare of the rich and corporate lords, spoiling the image of the nation. This image has badly affected even judiciary wherefrom people expect full, guaranteed and genuine justice.
Like elsewhere, Indian courts, from down local to the Apex Court, cases in abundance have been pending mainly because most of them are fake and false and advocates and at times judges keep postponing the cases just like that. Lawyers and judges waste their time as well as the courts.
First of all fake cases should not be entertained by the courts and at the document writing level, veracity of the facts should be ascertained before documents are allowed b document writers to produce documents and the document registration offices should also verify if the facts presented as facts are really true. Verification process might take some time but that is worth the trouble because by that precious time of courts can be saved to argue real cases. Today any rogue can produce fake documents and register them at the offices by paying bribes everywhere, thereby causing problems for the judiciary. Lawyers aid the rogues to produce fake documents and judges allow the cases to proceed on fake documents seeking just “some” proof that could easily be presented y by the advocates and the judges who were lawyers before just oblige the lawyers to go ahead.
A big show of lies and mischief and totally farce!
Courts should verify the facts of a case even of complicated ones before delivering judgments because judgment needs to be truthful and entirely valid. Lower courts quickly deliver judgments deliberately wrong expecting the higher courts to study the cases and of the needful
Courts should use the services of honest intelligence that cannot be bribed or influenced by the “concerned” persons to ascertain the facts before judgments are passed.
Chief Justice should not ignore the truth about why and how cases are delayed and why there are thousands of unresolved cases in all courts.
Judiciary is lifeline of legal societies and hence it has pivotal role to play in every country. Hence courts are places meant for worship by those who handle law. Courts aren’t just the money making spots. Spot fixing in courts against the constitution is immoral and illegal.
The importance of judiciary in any system of government cannot be disputed or questioned chiefly because without it system can collapse. It is well known that flaws in judicial system or delivery of justice, including negative phenomena, can harm the proper functioning of jurisprudence and badly hamper genuine judgment delivery without favor and nepotism and without getting involved in corrupt practices.
The need for honest and truly secular judges without involvement in any corruption issues needs not over stressed. Quality of judges determine quality of proceedings and speedy judgments
Judiciary suffers from all sorts of drawbacks in developed as well as developing nations. Any negative phenomena in judiciary can negatively affect the life of a given society by encouraging even the creation of fake governments. Courts are essentially meant for the rich people to pursue their greedy projects, targeting the poor and common people. People have to think about the cost factor as well as lengthy processes. This fact should change in any modern democracy, including developing and developed nations. .
There is a general understanding in the public domain that money can make law salute the criminals and frauds and without money none can get justice from courts. This public impression is devastating for any system of government as it harms the legal system.
The Judiciary interprets the Constitution as its final arbiter. It is its duty as mandated by the Constitution, to be its watchdog, by calling for scrutiny any act of the legislature or the executive, who otherwise, are free to enact or implement these, from overstepping bounds set for them by the Constitution. It acts like a guardian in protecting the fundamental rights of the people, as enshrined in the Constitution, from infringement by any organ of the state. It also balances the conflicting exercise of power between the centre and a state or among states, as assigned to them by the Constitution.
The term “judiciary” is also used to refer collectively to the personnel, such as judges, magistrates and other adjudicators, who form the core of a judiciary (sometimes referred to as a “bench”), as well as the staffs that keep the system running smoothly.
The judiciary – also known as the judicial system or court system – is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary generally makes laws for the nation and provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. In some nations, the judiciary can make law, known as Common Law, by setting precedent for other judges to follow, as opposed to Statutory Law made by the legislature. The Judiciary is often tasked with ensuring equal justice under law. In some nations, under doctrines of separation of powers, the judiciary generally does not make law as law making is the responsibility of the legislature or enforce law which is the responsibility of the executive. Judiciary rather interprets law and applies it to the facts of each case.
In many jurisdictions the judicial branch has the power to change laws through the process of judicial review. Courts with judicial review power may annul the laws and rules of the state when it finds them incompatible with a higher norm, such as primary legislation, the provisions of the constitution or international law.
Judges occupy a very special status in any political system. Unlike other professionals, including teachers, medical doctors and persons engaged in examination works, etc, where there is a possibility of favoritism, nepotism and corruption, judges cannot be biased nor afford to be insincere in their duty in any manner.
A judge presides over court proceedings, either alone or as a part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions. The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and in an open court. The judge hears all the ‘witnesses’ and any other ‘evidence’ presented by the lawyers or barristers of the case, assesses the ‘credibility’ and arguments of the parties, and then issues a ruling on the matter at hand based on his or her interpretation of the law and his or her own personal judgment.
In some jurisdictions, the judge’s powers may be shared with a jury. In inquisitorial systems of criminal investigation, a judge might also be an examining magistrate. In India at district levels, district collectors or equivalent officiate as district magistrate as well.
Concerns and hypocrisy
Recently, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) TS Thakur India has asked the government to speed up process of appointment of more judges to deliver judgments without delay. He sought to link huge backlog of cases and vacancies in the judiciary, saying due do the delay in filing up vacancies the cases keep piling up in various courts. He has flagged the issue several times publicly on many occasions.
Once again highlighting the issue of vacancies in the judiciary and huge backlog of cases, Chief Justice of India T S Thakur said the process of appointment of judges must be accelerated. TS Thakur was addressing the first state conference of judicial officers, organised by the Chhattisgarh High Court and the State Judicial Academy in Bilaspur.
The CJI has flagged the issue in his public speeches on many occasions in the recent past. “There are 12 judges per 10 lakh people in the country and at least three crore cases are pending in the courts. There is a need to speed up the process of appointment to vacant posts of judges,” Justice Thakur said.
As per the Law Commission’s report in 1987, 40,000 judges were needed then, but even today the strength of judiciary was only 18,000, he said. If the situation did not change, the figure of pending cases would cross five crore in the next 15-20 years, and crores of people would be deprived of justice, the CJI said.
As per the Law Commission’s report in 1987, 40,000 judges were needed then, but even today the strength of judiciary was only 18,000, he said. If the situation did not change, the figure of pending cases would cross five crore in the next 15-20 years, and crores of people would be deprived of justice, the CJI said. Appointments can be made gradually by setting a target for the next five years, Thakur said, adding that he had expressed his concerns on the issue with the Prime Minister too.
Appointments can be made gradually by setting a target for the next five years, Thakur said, adding that he had expressed his concerns on the issue with the Prime Minister too. — The foremost attribute of judiciary is honesty, he said. “If any person, belonging to any sector, is not honest, then he must be a trader (“dukandar”). An arbitrator should not be a trader and is not supposed to sell judgment. Therefore, honesty is the foremost quality needed in the judiciary,” the CJI said.
A good judge is the one who gives a patient hearing to both the sides before dispensing justice, Justice Thakur said. As per the Law Commission’s report in 1987, 40,000 judges were needed then, but even today the strength of judiciary was only 18,000, he said. Appointments can be made gradually by setting a target for the next 5 years, he said.
However, Justice Thakur refuses to recognize the critical truth about huge fake an d false cases in the courts wasting the valuable time of courts and judges. In many cases genuine cases are not taken up. CJI also declines to admit the corruption in the courts, especially judges. As lawyers are mediating to influence the judges by sharing money the culprits offer to them.
Apart from appointments of judges, government also controls the budget of the judiciary. Naturally government indirectly controls judiciary and even judgments of major cases.
Budget of the judiciary in many transitional and developing countries is almost completely controlled by the executive. The latter undermines the separation of powers, as it creates a critical financial dependence of the judiciary. The proper national wealth distribution including the government spending on the judiciary is subject of the constitutional economics. It is important to distinguish between the two methods of corruption of the judiciary: the state (through budget planning and various privileges), and the private.
In some countries and jurisdictions, judiciary branch is expanded to include additional public legal professionals and institutions such as prosecutors, state lawyers, ombudsmen, public notaries, judicial police service and legal aid officers. These institutions are sometimes governed by the same judicial administration that governs courts, and in some cases the administration of the judicial branch is also the administering authority for private legal professions such as lawyers and private notary offices. Such interdependence makes judiciary vulnerable to the state control mechanism.
The Indian Judiciary administers a common law system of legal jurisdiction, in which customs, precedents and legislation, all codify the law of the land. It has in part, inherited the legacy of the legal system established by the then colonial powers and the princely states since the mid-19th century, and has partly retained characteristics of practices from the ancient and medieval times.
There are various levels of judiciary in India – different types of courts, each with varying powers depending on the tier and jurisdiction bestowed upon them. They form a strict hierarchy of importance, in line with the order of the courts in which they sit, with the Supreme Court of India at the top, followed by High Courts of respective states with district judges sitting in District Courts and Magistrates of Second Class and Civil Judge at the bottom. Courts hear criminal and civil cases, including disputes between individuals and the government. The judiciary is independent of the executive and legislative branches of government according to the Constitution of India.
While pronouncing decisions under its constitutional mandate, it is expected to remain unaffected by pulls and pressures exerted by other branches of the state, citizens or interest groups. And crucially, independence of the judiciary has been held to be a basic feature of the Constitution, and which being inalienable, has come to mean – that which cannot be taken away from it by any act or amendment by the legislature or the executive. This independence shows up in the following manner: No minister, or even the executive collectively, can suggest any names for appointment as judges, to the President, who ultimately decides on appointing them from a list of names recommended only by the collegium of the judiciary. Nor can judges of the Supreme Court or a High Court be removed from office once appointed, unless an overwhelming two-thirds of members of any of the Houses of the Parliament back the move, and only on grounds of proven misconduct or incapacity. A person who has been a judge of a court is debarred from practicing in the jurisdiction of that court.
Judges constitute a critical force for interpretation and implementation of a constitution, thusde facto in common law countries creating the body of constitutional law. For a people to establish and keep the ‘Rule of Law’ as the operative norm in social constructs great care is taken in the election and/or appointment of unbiased and thoughtful legal scholars whose loyalty to an oath of office is without reproach.
If law is to govern and find acceptance generally courts must exercise fidelity to justice which means affording those, subject to its jurisdictional scope the greatest presumption of inherent cultural relevance within this framework.
In the US during recent decades the judiciary became active in economic issues related with economic rights established by constitution because “economics may provide insight into questions that bear on the proper legal interpretation”. Since many countries with transitional political and economic systems continue treating their constitutions as abstract legal documents disengaged from the economic policy of the state, practice of judicial review of economic acts of executive and legislative branches have begun to grow.
In the 1980s, the Supreme Court of India for almost a decade had been encouraging public interest litigation on behalf of the poor and oppressed by using a very broad interpretation of several articles of the Indian Constitution.
Indian courts have millions of pending cases owing to lack of judges and lengthy procedures. On an average about 20% of the sanctioned positions for judges are vacant, whereas the annual increase in pendency is less than 2%. In 2015, it was reported that there were close to 400 vacancies for judge’s post in country’s 24 high courts. Arrears in the Supreme Court have mounted to around 65,000. There are some 30 million cases in various courts. Budget allocation for judiciary is a miserly 0.2 per cent of the gross domestic product. The judge-population ratio is 10.5 to one million, which should be 50 to one million.
If the vacancies were filled, pendencies would go down and make the justice system deliver efficiently. Traffic challans, police challans and cheque bounce cases make up nearly half of all pending cases.
The government has been the largest, single party litigating before the courts, and has kept adding cases to the over-burdened courts despite losing most, and then on losing, has relentlessly taken them to the next court, much of this being avoidable, according to the Law Commission.
The vast number of cases pending in the Supreme Court as well as the other lower courts has defeated the very purpose of the judicial system.
For justice delayed, is in effect justice denied.
Judicial corruption as constitutional sin
When judges are reported to b taking bribes to settle cases, when a former Chief Justice is caught involved in corrupt practices to the tune of crores of Indian currency, very little the people can trust judiciary’s ability to be honest. From discreet nature judiciary corruption has become open. In public as many top politicians get out of prisons and when judges write fake judgments in their favor, obviously on payment basis.
Judgments are being sold just like some government decisions and orders come out on similar conditions favoring compote lords and important persons controlling the elected governments. . . .
Is it justice?
Corruption, common not just in third world but even in western countries, has affected even military and judiciary. Bribery, being practiced by most people, has harmed the poor and common people the most. There is some hope that judiciary can help and save them. Rulers and parliaments, themselves are basically corrupt, don’t wish to reform the corrupt system.
Corruption is rampant in India’s courts. According to Transparency International, judicial corruption in India is attributable to factors such as “delays in the disposal of cases, shortage of judges and complex procedures, all of which are exacerbated by a preponderance of new laws”. Most disturbing is the fact that corruption has reached the highest judicial forum i.e. Supreme Court of India. Some notable cases include: In December 2009, legal activist and Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan stated in court, “out of the last 16 to 17 Chief Justices, half have been corrupt. In November 2010, former Law Minister, Shanti Bhushan echoed Prashant Bhushan’s claim.
Not many people are happy with the judiciary and judges for their apparently faulty judgments and reasons for this state of affairs could be several. Reliability of judgments is questioned.
There have been allegations that judges with doubtful integrity are elevated within the higher judiciary and campaigns held for their impeachment have not been successful. In November 2011, a former Supreme Court Justice Ruma Pal slammed the higher judiciary for what she called the seven sins. She listed the sins as: Turning a blind eye to the injudicious conduct of a colleague; Hypocrisy – the complete distortion of the norm of judicial independence; Secrecy – the fact that no aspect of judicial conduct including the appointment of judges to the High and Supreme Court is transparent; Plagiarism and prolixity – meaning that very often SC judges lift whole passages from earlier decisions by their predecessors and do not acknowledge this – and use long-winded, verbose language; Self Arrogance – wherein the higher judiciary has claimed crass superiority and independence to mask their own indiscipline and transgression of norms and procedures; Professional arrogance – whereby judges do not do their homework and arrive at decisions of grave importance ignoring precedent or judicial principle; Nepotism – wherein favors are sought and dispensed by some judges for gratification of varying manner;.
In 2011, Soumitra Sen, former judge at the Calcutta High Court became the first judge in the India to be impeached by the Rajya Sabha for misappropriation of funds.
In recent years scandals about lack of integrity have besmirched the reputation of the judiciary. The sub-ordinate judiciary works in appalling conditions. Any reform undertaken must be in its totality rather than in isolation.
On 12 January 2012, a Supreme Court bench said that people’s faith in judiciary was decreasing at an alarming rate, posing a grave threat to constitutional and democratic governance of the country. It acknowledged some of the serious problems of a large number of vacancies in trial courts, unwillingness of lawyers to become judges, and the failure of the apex judiciary in filling vacant posts of HC judges.
Apex Court wanted to seek answers from the government on amicus curiae’s suggestion that access to justice must be made a constitutional right and consequently the executive must provide necessary infrastructure for ensuring every citizen enjoyed this right. It also wanted the Government of India to detail the work being done by the National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms.
There have been cases where ordinary citizens have been charged for espionage while overstaying their visa or straying across the international land or maritime boundary and languishing in prison for years due to the slow redressal process.
Delay in judgments by prolonging the hearing for too long in repeated adjournments, is just one issue. Lawyers make huge money by helping their clients with lies, fake documents and false evidences is another important issue. Courts’ disability to comprehend the truth on the basis of real facts rather than going by concocted proofs and evidences is another issue.
To reduce pendency, ‘Fast-track courts’, ‘Evening courts/Morning courts’ were set up and have met with mixed success so far. ‘Mobile courts’ are being set up to bring ‘justice at the doorsteps of litigants of far-flung remote and backward rural areas.
However, Lok Adalats an informal, alternative mechanism has been a phenomenal success in tackling pendency, especially in pre-litigation matters, settling fresh cases before they become full-blown disputes and enter the courts.
But the most significant fault or lacuna lies in the very selection process of judges for higher courts, where honesty and truthfulness of judges should be the top priority.
This article argues for a special stream of direct judges to handle serious cases. .
A healthy judiciary in all respects is a positive sign any nation can be proud of as its major achievement.
It is a crucial issue and making judiciary work honestly should be the priority of every government in the world so that a society behaves well and works in the best traditions.
Judges should be differentiated from lawyers. A law student can become a law teacher in nay institution but that cannot be extended to a law becoming a judge in the field of court law.
That is cause of all problems Indians suffer for too long – created partly by politicians, partly by the governments and elected representatives of people, partly by the parliament and state assemblies, partly by the media lords, partly by mafias, partly by illogical police, partly by the judiciary and partly by the helpless people of India.
Judiciary can do a lot for the benefits of people and nation of India.
Understandably, there are many people, including lawyers who are interested in meeting select judges and senior lawyers possibly trying to fix cases on huge down payments.
Judges are not like administrators or teachers or any category of people who manage things. They are highly responsible and hence highly respectable people who are the s conscience keepers of the nation and society. Judges cannot be compared with officals politicians, MPs or MLAs, or ministers or cricketers – primarily because generally they tell lies, cheat people, play mischief and don’t deliver and incapable of deliver justice to people. Judges have the power to ruin or upgrade the fate of humans. Hence judges are serious people.
India follows the British system of justice. Some aspects have been borrowed from USA. But we have not made efforts to make our judicial system genuine as we make the same blunders as the western systems commit in order to protect the big criminals as lawyers and judges joint play mischief.
India could initiate steps to make the judicial system really credible and judgments very genuine. India could urgently create Judicial Commission to promote good lawyers and create real judges not from the best of lawyers as the practice now but from among the direct recruits as judges. The said commission should have top luminaries of law and top judges who served the nation with dedication and dignity and without getting involved in any immoral disputes or bribery scandals – officially or otherwise, Judges with genuinely clean image would be in the commission in order to save judiciary and jurisprudence. The recruits as new judges also should have enough experience in watching and commenting on proceedings and judgments for a number of years and they should be tested before appointments. During probation their professional movements should be carefully watched monitored and evaluated by a team of specialists so that judges are really worthy leaders in law.
Now- a-days, officials punish the subordinates or workers, teachers, etc at times arbitrarily and the affected persons have to approach the courts for justice. Courts generally cancel the said official orders or refuse to do that, but they never take any punitive measures against the officials for wrong actions or with vengeance. If the officals are found wrong in their punitive actions, suspension or dismissal, etc, they should also be punished for causing agony to the affected persons. Such counter measures by the courts will a long way in reducing wrong actions against ‘small” people.
Some of the issues that are raised here were discussed earlier in another article. Another article would be necessary to elaborate the judgmental lacuna in some details.
A positive note: since there are good and honest judges the system functions continuously, notwithstanding pressures from the lawyers and money lords. However, all efforts need to be made to make the judicial system work as perfectly as possible with truly independent, honest and committed judges so that every judge is trustworthy.
The judicial system should make judges a class apart. There could be honest and hardwiring people in every walk of life, every field and that is how the system functions even with drawbacks. But in judiciary every judge must be genuine and responsible for the society and hence they have to be accountable for their actions.
Lack of talent
Judiciary is no longer attracting the best legal talent because of disparity in the income of bright young lawyers and the emoluments of judicial officers. In order to attract persons of the right caliber to the judicial cadre, System must keep enhancing salaries, improve their service conditions, particularly of the trial court judges.
Judiciary’s blind eye on genocides of Kashmiris
That judiciary si entirely controlled by the government could b gauged by the way it ignores genocides of Muslims in Kashmir by Indian (occupation) forces. At least the apex court should have questioned the logic of killing Muslims of Kashmir who seek sovereignty back from aggressors and occupiers on false claims and pretexts.
There are two important issues affecting normalcy of Indian system and judicial neutrality: Babri Mosque and Kashmir. In both issues, judiciary is either weak or subservient to the government.
When we talk about problems of judiciary and judges, we must also talk about the pathetic plight of Muslims in Jammu Kashmir, now under Indian control. Jammu Kashmir had been a soverign nation and India’s neighbor before India, after its independence from Great Britain, invaded and occupied it.
Judicial inaction against state crimes in occupied Kashmir is a case of serious concern. Indian forces have killed over 100,000 innocent Kashmir Muslims in its efforts to silence them and end their legitimate struggle for freedom from Indian yoke.
Courts do not take up the plight of Kashmiri Muslims Kashmir which is under heavy military occupational control. While Hindus are treated as state guests, Muslims, including the children are ill treated even on streets by the police and military forces controlling the capital and elsewhere. NO one questions the Indian logic.
Kashmiri Muslims can be treated the way the military likes in Kashmir. The governor has given the permission to ‘squeeze’ the Kashmir Muslims as much as they can be and make Hindus happy. The Kashmiris reeling under state torture mechanisms in various jails in Jammu Kashmir and India main have been reported in these columns. It is no more secret that Kashmiris and other Muslims are ill-treated by authorities in Indian jails and crudest interrogative methods are being administered on Kashmiris in Tihar jail.
If police suspects any Muslims they are arrested and tortured in jails and force them to ’admit’ that they are terrorists and they are trained in Pakistan. Khursheed Ahmed Lone, arrested in 2005 on fictitious charges of now famous “suspected terrorist” in Srinagar underwent punishment in jail without proper trial but was letter “picked-up” by Maharashtra police from Srinagar jail, but nothing is known about his fate. The accused has been implicated in a number of other prefabricated cases. His incarceration in Mumbai is affecting the trial of Shabir Ahmed Bukhari of Kreeri Patan, (a law graduate), Shakeel Ahmed Sofi Abdul Rashid Kahan, his wife Roshni, Rouf Ahmed, Waheed Ahmed Dar, Abdul waheed Dar and Muhammad Maqbool Beig.
Khursheed who was lodged in central jail Srinagar was taken to Mumbai by the sleuths of Anti Terrorism Squad Maharashtra. Since then the local courts have been asking the Maharashtra government to produce him for trial in Srinagar but the orders have been thrown to winds.
The Judge requested the officials to look into the matter personally and direct the concerned officers to produce the accused before this court on August 13. Seven more accused persons are facing trial along with the accused in four other cases. “Non production of the accused is stalling the proceedings in all the four cases. The other accused are unnecessarily suffering for no fault of theirs.
The judge hopes the directions would be carried out with positive response. Khursheed Ahmed Lone son of Abdul Gani Lone of Sopore, a fruit trader was arrested by police at Srinagar on the ‘suspicion’ of providing logistic support to two suicide bombers who were killed in an “encounter” with police near Dalgate in the capital Sri Nagar, hours before the then PM Manmohan Singh was scheduled to address a gathering at Sher-e- Kashmir Cricket Stadium at Srinagar in 2005.
All judicial directions in this regard are gathering dust. The accused has not been produced before the court till date.” When a judge is powerless what about the ordinary Muslims in the country?
Can Indian judiciary also be insensitive to human sufferings and play into the hands of the regime and admit political victimization of Muslims and anti-Kashmirism and anti-Muslims in the country?
All these year of brutality, genocide, rape and crime and illegal dealings in Kashmir by occupying Indian government, Kashmiris have not yet openly asked the Indian terrorist forces to QUIT KASHMIR”, but now Hindus in Jammu have , especially the Hindutva outfit parties have done so by asking Kashmiris to quit Jammu.
Once the JK State President of Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) reiterated that Kashmiris (Muslims) should leave Jammu and go to the Kashmir valley, immediately. “Those Kashmiri touts of National Conference, PDP, and Geelani”, who have constructed houses in Jammu region should immediately vacate the land in the summer capital and go back to Kashmir.
Ultra communal outfit BJP considers and says that Congress, like PDP, NC, CPI, CPI (M), PDP and all other Kashmir-based politicians and separatists have communal mindset. Taking a dig at former Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, it was said, “It was during his minority status regime that all the Jammu-based Congress ministers joined hands to appease fanatics and reversed land transfer order under which 8000 kanals of land at Baltal had been transferred to the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (SASB) for creating “facilities” for the pilgrims.” The BJP State President has repeatedly threatened “Kashmiri touts” of “dire consequences” if they don’t quit the Jammu forthwith.
Interestingly, today the Kashmiri touts of PDPD runs a government in JK with BJP support and with a Hindu as deputy CM.
Obviously, the fact that the reversals they received in their secret dealings to steal the forest land for temple structure constructions have not been tolerated by Hindus who do everything according to their wishes in India and therefore felt shaken and rather threatened by this, has made them agitate over the issue to get the land back for temple purposes.
Theory vs. practice
The legal premises or thesis no innocent should be punished but as many guilty persons as possible can escape a possible punishment is not a healthy argument.
How can a corrupt and dishonest lawyer become an honest and lawful after becoming a judge or justice? How can corrupt judge be expected to deliver honest judgments? No wonder corruption has become a part of Indian justice delivery system and jurisprudence.
When dishonest lawyers become judges they continue to mint money and this explains as to why many judges are being caught across the globe in bribery scandals.
Won’t there be murder of judgments in courts? Why politicians and top bureaucrats boldly take bribes and make illegal wealth so openly?
When corrupt and greedy lawyers are the judges in courts, people cannot expect real and honest judgments
Can thieves and criminals become police and judges? But that perhaps is happening. The judiciary and jurisprudence has fallen a mute victim (Your lord!).
Politicians and government functionaries take undue advantage of this disastrous lacuna, detrimental to the honest upbringing of a society. .
Of course, suggestion is made here that Indian system would be fair and honest if lawyers are not promoted as judges as has been the case hitherto but judges are trained right from the beginning after their excellent degrees in law (unlike the shameful practice of undergoing a law course just for obtaining degrees without proper attendance, at times on payment basis to practice law) as future hopes of Indian honest and fair judges to uphold pride and dignity of judiciary. Much more is required to make the system work honestly.
Corruption in courts at high levels, involving judges is a serious concern. Bribery for judges is very serious crime. But when judges accept or demand bribes for ‘favourable’ judgments they become criminals. Just like politicians and bureaucrats do, Judges use middlemen for making quick wealth as they won’t be caught or punished for disproportionate asset cases.
That makes the entire system of a nation suspicious and dirty.
Hence judges have to be saved from dishonesty and discredit they may suffer due the presence of wrong or corrupt or extremely self-centered judges among genuine judges.
Should Judiciary promote corruption and nepotism?
The Supreme Court sent out a loud warning to the high and mighty, including politicians, not to try to change the course of judicial proceedings with corrupt practices and said any such attempt would be dealt with an iron hand. “Please keep corrupt practices away from judiciary. At least this institution should be spared,” a bench of Justices T S Thakur and Rohinton F Nariman said while hearing a petition by mining baron Gali Janardhan Reddy, who is accused of paying a bribe of Rs 10 crore to a trial judge for getting bail.
Reddy approached the court seeking that two cases filed against him — one for illegal mining and another for bribery — be heard together as the facts and evidence of the cases arose from the same offence.
Expressing concern over attempts to bribe judges, the bench said, “People are having so much money that they are now bribing judges. When money comes in abundance, then people don’t know what to do with the money. They try to subvert the entire system and judicial process. Anyone who plays with the court system must be dealt with heavily. This virus has to be eliminated.” It added that people who adopted corrupt practices like bribing a judicial officer were actually attempting to hijack the system.
The bench asked the counsel appearing for Reddy how much money was allegedly paid to the judge. The lawyer tried to skirt the question but the bench insisted on knowing the amount. “Don’t feel embarrassed to tell the amount,” the bench said. The counsel said the allegation against his client was that he paid Rs 10 crore.
Reddy submitted that the two cases against him were related and should be tried together. He said his defence would be exposed if the cases were not clubbed together. “What defence can a person have for bribing a judge,” the bench asked.
The CBI has alleged that trial judge T Pattabhirama Rao granted bail to Reddy after the mining baron agreed to pay Rs 10 crore. The judge was later suspended by the Andhra Pradesh High Court and the CBI filed an FIR against him, his son and five others including Reddy.
In a shocking disclosure, a special CBI judge said on Aug 17, 2014 that the high-profile accused in the alleged Syndicate Bank bribery case had sought to influence her.
“Please tell your clients to stop sending love letters to me. I am already from a well off background, if you don’t stop this act, I will direct CBI to take action against you,” Special CBI Judge Swarana Kanta Sharma said.
The woman judge warned of action against the accused for making attempts of “influencing” her by writing “love letters” to her. The court made these strong remarks while remanding the bank’s suspended CMD Sudhir Kumar Jain and others to judicial custody till August 29.
It was an open court and the judge refrained from elaborating on the attempts of the accused to influence However, she strictly directed the defence counsels to make their clients behave. It was not clear if her remarks were against some of the accused or against all the accused in the case.
The arrest of Sudhir Kumar Jain is one of most high profile cases involving a serving state-run bank chief in over two decades. CBI officials had said that Jain was arrested from Bangalore when one of his relatives, a chartered accountant, was taking Rs 50 lakh as bribe from a private company. Two companies for which Jain allegedly raised the credit limit are Prakash Industries and Bhushan Steel, which are being probed by the CBI in the coal block allocation scam, officials at the agency had said.
Bhushan Steel Vice Chairman Neeraj Singal, Chief Financial Officer of Bhushan Steel Arun Agarwal, Vineet Godha, Puneet Godha and Vijay Pahuja were the other accused who were sent to judicial custody. Jain, who was suspended as chairman and managing director after his arrest early this month, and Singal were produced in court after expiry of their judicial custody while the other accused were brought from jail on court’s production warrants.
The court, on August 12, had issued production warrants against them. The CBI has filed two cases against Jain — accusing him of receiving a bribe of Rs 50 lakh through conduits and abusing his official position to enhance the credit limits of some companies in violation of laid-down procedures.
Singal was arrested by CBI on August 7, hours after the court had issued a Non-Bailable Warrant against him and an alleged middleman, Purushotam Totlani in the case. On August 2, CBI had arrested six accused, including Jain and Agarwal.
Chief Justice of Karnataka Subhro Kamal Mukherjee on 07th July 2016 confirmed what he had said in court a day earlier: someone had offered him money to deliver a favourable judgment. “Whatever I have revealed in the open court hall is true,” he told Express on Wednesday. Asked what action he was planning against the bribery attempt, he said recusal from the case was action enough.
The sensational disclosure that a Bengali-speaking person had visited his house and tried to bribe him has brought forth shocked responses from the legal fraternity.
Advocates’ bodies are urging the judiciary to take up a suo motu case and conduct an inquiry to identify the person who had tried to influence the justice system.
H C Shivaramu, president, Advocates’ Association of Bengaluru, described the incident as unfortunate. “Immediate action is called for against the visitor and those behind the visitor,” he said. “Such interference can be curbed if the culprit is suitably punished.”
Karnataka State Bar Council Chairman A R Patil had heard about Mukherjee’s disclosure. “I don’t know whether the Chief Justice has filed a complaint with the police. But dubious visitors should not be allowed near judges,” he said. On Tuesday, Mukherjee made the sensational disclosure as he was hearing a revision petition filed by Umrah Developers against the Revenue Department and the Deputy Commissioner of Bengaluru Urban district.
After telling the court a visitor had tried to buy a favourable verdict, he recused himself from the case, and told a senior counsel to take a photocopy of the visiting card the visitor had left behind.
CBI claimed to have recovered Rs 21 lakh in cash from Jain’s residence besides gold worth Rs 1.68 crore and documents of fixed deposits of up to Rs 63 lakh.
In the two FIRs, CBI has named Singal, Ved Prakash Agarwal, Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Prakash Industries, Pawan Bansal, chartered accountant, Vineet and Puneet Godha (relatives of Jain), Vijay Pahuja, Totlani and Pankaj Bansal. The accused have been booked under various provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and criminal conspiracy under the IPC.
Story involves investigation of crimes committed by Judges is On-Line-Publicized with avowed Patriotic intention to weed-out corrupt Judges on one-hand & on the other to improve Quality of Justice as well as to enhance Confidence of General Public in Judiciary. The views / opinions / remedies (proposed) are ours. As the Story involves Constitution & its Functionaries it is advised to understand Righteousness or otherwise of this story; to consult Experts having knowledge of working of Parliamentary Democracy, Constitutional Law of India, Freedom of Speech & Expression.
Only CBI is authorized to investigate Crimes committed by Judges; the Jurisdiction of State Police of any State is barred.
To avoid Common Men losing Confidence in Judiciary on-one-hand & on-other-hand with a fore-thought that Sensible Constitutional Functionaries will rise to the occasion, without loss of time, in discharging their Duties; we have published Draft / in-complete Story backed by bare necessary Documents & brief arguments with anticipation that they will understand complete Story.
The gist of story is flashed to all Members of Parliament to enable them to discuss in Parliament to find ways & means to reduce and if possible to eradicate Corruption in Judiciary. It enables every MP to discuss vote for National Judicial Services Bill, to amend Judges (Judicial Officers’ Protection) Act, & other such laws so as to bring the erring Judges within the reach of Common Law. With full evidence, court records, live cases, and admittance to crimes by the judges themselves.
What the story involves is of a (Microscopic) Housing Society consisting of 867 judges out of total 2600 public/government servants. The membership is not compulsory inter alia is restricted only to “Employees of Karnataka State Judicial Department” but on voluntary basis . The aims and objects of Judges becoming members of this society is to get a PLOT of land in exchange for PLOTS viz., misusing their positions including their offices to further the illegal aims and objects of the society.
What Crimes have they Committed, necessitating Peoples’ Resolution?:
The “Long & Short of Crimes Judges have committed” is this that if were to be committed by any ordinary persons/Advocates/Minister including Judges; same would have been languishing in Jail. The Corrupt Judges, PLOTTERS for the heck of a PLOT of land have made many conspiracies (PLOTs); to defeat laws of India, Rendered & Secured fraud judgments, legalized illegals. Evidences of crimes perpetrated on Laws, Govt. & Court are adduced by themselves. They admit that JUDICIAL LAY-OUT or Judges Slum is a result of not only Fraud Judgments but also of Un-Holy Alliance of Judiciary with Govt. of Karnataka (if not Legislature also) since 1985. Few cases are alive in Supreme Court & High Court (which are well informed in this website/CD); which cases inadvertently prove our earlier statements. Estimated amount involved is Rs. 17 Lakh Billion.
It is most unfortunate that Judicial Emp. HBCS which should have been model to other Housing Societies, has itself become the Leading Law breaker without the least fear or Care for Law; Propriety or Public Interest. It has indulged in acts of Favor, Cronyism and capricious indifference to Law at Will, obviously under the hubris that having S.C & H.C. Judges as its Members & beneficiaries will ensure immunity to all its Illegal acts.
What is more disquieting is the Readiness with which sitting S.C & H.C Judges who are not “Employees” under any Government but are Constitutional functionaries, should have eagerly become members of Employees HBCS and obtained sites. Having registered office in Karnataka high Court building itself invoking “Awe & Terror in the Minds of various Government Agencies who have to take action against the Society as per law, do not create an atmosphere of Fairplay, Straightforwardness or Impartial dispensation of JUSTICE”
The Investigations reveal that this Society’s Illegal activities have Topped list of Cheating & Frauds in this Country, by the way Society has violated Gravest-of Grave Laws. I feel pity to Express, JUDICIAL LAY-OUT, has become MOTHER of ALL ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. Committee has received Complaints that stating that other Societies have also indulged in Similar illegal Activities.
Therefore to take stringent Action against illegal activities of Karnataka state Judicial department Employees’ House Building Co-operative Housing Society, it is Recommended to supersede the Society forthwith & to initiate Criminal prosecution against persons who are responsible for r such nefarious Activities.
Need for Indian Judicial Service (IJS)
At par with IAS, IFS, IPS, there is a need for an institution like Indian Judicial Service (IJS) to train and recruit the judicial personnel- the judges, mainly. The process of final selection of judges of all levels should be rigorous so people stop suspecting the judges and judges deliver genuine justice to nation and people. .
India should do away with the practice of appointing senior lawyers as judges, which has not worked well as malpractices and corruption have become rampant and prevalent at all levels. Judgments encourage corruption especially at lower courts. Only rich or people with a lot of money alone can approach the upper or lower courts
Government should ensure the Indian Judicial Service serves the cause of speedy and genuine justice to the people while Indian Judicial Service should ensure that only persons of integrity are selected for the top ranked jobs in judiciary and, therefore, the nation. Top judges of Supreme and High courts who make the Indian Judicial Service commission should certify that the personnel chosen are indeed fit for the top judiciary jobs.
People at large are fast losing faith judiciary and judges. And that is a devastating trend a society can witness. The belief that money can win – and is winning- even the most difficult cases because it can engage buy not only the top lawyers but also buy the judges is not a healthy sign of any normal society.
Judiciary should serve the cause of justice delivery by way of honest judgments. For this to happen, judges should be honest.
Good crops of judges can deliver the most genuine judgments to make a nation proud of its judiciary system, its capacity to deliver true judgments.
Common people cannot afford to approach higher courts and hence judgments in lower courts also have to be truthful and credible.
Reports say a Chief Justice of India has been reportedly involved in corruption deals. Many judges are named as bribe takers. Some judges have misused their power to get lands and housing plots. (Government should consider giving permanent residence for the Chief justice and land to judges free cost if they do not have their houses or lands for housing so that this class could saved from chasing “sources” for houses or lands)
The Judicial or Law Commission should not have any bureaucrats or politicians like law minister etc, for; they could influence the legal process or selection process of judges. Only law secretary could be there.
There is no need to expect western ‘democracies’ to launch the necessary judicial reforms by preparing judges in a special stream.
There could be two streams in law education – one training for lawyers and another creation of trust worthy judges. Training for judges could be undertaken by Judiciary Commission or law academy of efficient judges and academicians who oppose corruption of any kind.
In order to loot the nation’s resources and promote bribery-dowry system, Indian politicians have done away with what is very dear to a nation: honesty and truth. That is the crux of negative predicaments of Indian nation. A parliament of rich and agents of corporate lords cannot be honest. The rich lawyers, who become judges by immoral means and after playing all sorts of mischief with the common people that approach them with genuine problems for help, cannot honestly decide the fate of Indian nation, either.
It can’t be denied that a few genuine advocates have made themselves into good judges as well. They deliver genuine judgments. But that is not the case in many cases where judges use constitution to validate certain hypothesis to help even the known criminals and international frauds.