Instant Justice Or Real Justice?

[The author, Pragya Vaishnav is an 8th Semester, B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) student at the Indore Institute of Law]

INTRODUCTION

The Judicial System of India

Our Indian judicial system is based on the principle of natural justice. In the Hyderabad Rape case, the four accused were killed in an encounter without the benefit of due process of the law. DUE PROCESS is the principal where the administration of justice according to established rules and principles based on the principle that a person cannot be deprived of life or liberty or property without appropriate legal procedures and safeguards.[1] That the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law. The due process holds the government subservient to the law of the land and protects the individual from the excesses of the state.[2] There is a maxim which is followed by Indian judiciary. ‘LET A HUNDRED GUILTY BE ACQUITTED, BUT ONE INNOCENT SHOULD NOT BE CONVICTED’. Justice is the ultimate aim of every legal system.[3]

Our Indian laws have no space for discriminatory laws, everyone is equal in the eyes of laws. In INDIA the problem is not with the law but the actual problem is people who ignore the law. There are so many rules which are made for the safeguarding for the people but not much of them has been followed by the people. The people don’t have persistence they want rapid relief which is not possible. If one is suffering it doesn’t mean the innocent will get punished for the same.

SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION

India is the socialist democratic secular sovereign and Republic country, India is not one of those countries where dictatorship, autarchy, tyranny and despotism is present. Dictatorship and all these are a form of government characterized by the rule of one person or a small group of people who have no checks and balance on their power.[4] Where opposing the superior views, rules or disobeying the laws a dictatorship can be punished with extreme violence and even death. Where public will, consent, prosperity and their freedom justice has no space.[5] In that country there is no place for the view of the general public and their welfare.

India is a democratic country and Democracy is the rule of the people, by the people and for the people. To protect the right of individual, certain institution and institutional mechanism are integral to democracy.[6] It is not possible for any of the organs to perform all the functions systematically and appropriately. So for the proper functioning of the powers, the power is distributed among the legislature, executive and judiciary.[7]

THE DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWER helps prevent the abuse of power. This doctrine protects the individual from the arbitrary rule. It has been well said by Lord Action: - Power corrupts and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. Conferment of power in a single body leads to absolutism. But, even after distinguished the functions, when an authority wields public power, then providing absolute and sole discretion to the body in the matter regarding its sphere of influence may also cause abuse such power. Therefore, the Doctrine of separation of power is a theoretical concept and is impracticable to follow it absolutely.[8] The status of a modern state is a lot more different than what it used to be. The three-pillar are made to serve the country accordingly. Judiciary is the important pillar of Indian democracy which maintain law and order in the country.[9]

ERROR IN THE HYDERABAD RAPE CASE

In the recent Rape case where 4 suspects of rape were killed in an encounter. It is necessary to punish the culprits, they should be punished. But the encounter is not the right way to punish them. It is not a proper way to delivered justice. Our Indian judiciary relies on many principles like justice equity and good conscience, ‘AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM’ which is the principle of natural justice where every person gets the chance of being heard. The meaning of the maxim itself says no person shall be CONDEMNED UNHEARD.[10] Hence no case or judgement can be decided without listening to the point of another party.

Presently the suspect did not get a chance to being heard, even if they are real culprit of the crime they have the right to present their selves. What if any innocent were framed for the crime which he has not been committed? The suspect will not be punished until the charges against him has not been proofed.[11]

As all, we know the famous ‘Ryan International school’ case which is also known as PRADUYUMAN Murder Case. The murder of the little child was earlier pinned on the bus conductor who was arrested by the Haryana police. Where the police officer forced him to accept that he had committed the crime. But when investigation conducted by a higher authority, another story came out that the bus conductor was not the real culprit. The real offender of the crime was a student of 11th class of that same school. To hide the real wrongdoer they are trying to put the blame of murder on the Bus conductor who was innocent. If the higher authority without investigation and appropriate evidence held the suspect liable. At that point there was a great miscarriage of justice, the innocent will be punished for the crime which he has not committed, the thing which he doesn’t know about.

PUNISHMENT SYSTEM

In India public hanging and mob killing are not allowed, India believes in fairness and justice for all.[12] The laws of India protect all class and creed it’s not discriminatory one. The authority has violated the law. There is a wide difference between judiciary and police. The police are the protector of the laws and people of the country. The police do not have the right to decide the punishment of culprit, only the judiciary has the power to decide the punishment for wrongdoer.[13]

CONCLUSION

For the sake of closing the case rapidly and hiding or safeguarding the real culprit from the penalty or punishment. Accusing someone innocent for the crime is grave adversity, where not only the innocent suffer his/her family also suffers. Although it is factual that judiciary takes time to deliver the verdict. But there are some procedures and regulations through which the matter goes on, after which the bonafide and genuine verdict has been delivered.

Disclaimer: This article is an original submission of the Author. Niti Manthan does not hold any liability arising out of this article. Kindly refer to our Terms of use or write to us in case of any concerns.

[1] PERCIVAL BILLIMORIA, The principles of natural justice – origin and Relevance, posted in constitutional law and criminal law dispute resolution, CYRIL AMARCHAND MANGALDAS,

[2] MR. A. H. HAWALDAR, Evolution of Due Process in India, BHARATI Law review, Dec 2014, Published in Articles section of www.manupatara.com

[3] VIDAR HALVORSEN, is it better ten guilty persons go free than that one innocent person be convicted, criminal justice Ethics Volume: 23 issue: 2,2004

[4] Jim Powell, How dictator comes to power in A democracy, 5 February 2013, Forbes

[5] Shanna Freeman, how dictators work, people. How stuff works

[6] DEWANGI SHARMA, legislature, executive and judiciary – three pillars of Indian Democracy, November 21, 2019, Law corner

[7] RICHA GOEL, Separation of power, published by JANHAVI ARAKERI in All, Constitutional law, General, India

[8] NIVETHA, Doctrine of Separation of powers, legal Service in India

[9] BANI MAHAJAN, Doctrine of separation of powers, Academike, on December 7, 2014

[10] KOUSINI GUPTA, AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – Legal Maxim, July 15, 2019, Law times Journal

[11] Arya Mishra, AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM, Published by Diva Rai in All, Constitution, General, India, Internship, Law

[12] KIRTI KABRA, Principle of natural justice, 25 September 2018, lawyers club India

[13] The Genesis and Development of punishment system in India, shodhganga