Disposal of cases depends on will of Govt.: judiciary

By Anil Sastry

BANGALORE, OCT. 11. The record time in which the trial of Veerappan-related cases was completed by the TADA Special Court at Mysore implies that speedy disposal of cases and elimination of pendency of cases depend on the will of the Government and the judiciary.

The yardsticks adopted by the Special Court, Mysore, could also be adopted by regular sessions courts in trying cases. The subscription is, however, subject to certain conditions, most of which, require to be fulfilled by the Government.

The most important steps taken by the Special Court were, strict enforcement of the presence of witnesses and investigating officers, examination of witnesses to the point, and ensuring that the arguments of the advocates were to the point. Also, the bent of mind of the presiding officer to complete the trial without delay has played an important role.

Senior advocates and judicial officers still recall the conduct of trials during and earlier than the 1970s. Once the trial of a case was taken up, it was completed without a break, sometimes within a week. "Sessions" itself meant completion of a trial in one session. However, trials now go on for months, forcing the accused to languish in judicial custody in many cases. Superintendents of police of respective districts used to visit the court, at least, once a week in the past.

The attendance of witnesses depends on the service of a court summons on them by the police, which in most cases, is either delayed, or not served at all. There are various reasons for this, including the deployment of police staff on other work. Similarly, investigating officers fail to turn up before the court on the date of hearing as they are posted on security duty, VIP security, law and order duty and so on.

The role of advocates in examining witnesses and forwarding arguments also contributes to the disposal of cases. The court's time would unnecessarily be wasted if advocates put irrelevant questions to witnesses or address lengthy arguments that are not relevant. Similarly, often seeking adjournment of a case would also consume much of a court's time.

Most of the sessions cases get delayed due to non-examination of technical witnesses, such as, doctors, forensic experts, finger print experts and so on when they appear before the court. Their evidence is not recorded due to the non-appearance of other witnesses or investigating officers or due to an adjournment sought by the advocates concerned.

The paucity of courts and judicial officers to try cases also adds to the delay in disposal of cases. On an average, every sessions court in the State has 300 to 1,000 pending cases, while one sessions judge can dispose of six to 10 cases in a month. Fresh cases come up before courts every day, adding to the number of pending cases. There is also lack of staff (800 in an estimate), and infrastructure in almost of all courts in the State, which add to the delay in disposing of cases.

It would not be difficult for regular sessions courts to speed up trials, provided the Government ensures the presence of witnesses and investigating officers on the dates of hearing, sets up required number of additional courts and appoints judicial officers in proportion to growing number of cases; and provides infrastructure and appoints the staff required. There are 500 judicial officers in the State, and the existing number of cases require, at least, double this number, according to highly-placed sources in the judiciary.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : CM rules out blanket permission to CBI
Next     : Steps to get accreditation for engineering degrees