Criminal Justice System | 22 Jun 2024

Source: TH

Why in News?

Recently, a fabricated rape accusation and sunsequent imprisonment revealed a range of systemic shortcomings in our law enforcement machinery and social complexities that demand urgent attention.

How is the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in India?

• About:
  • The criminal justice system of any state is the set of agencies and processes established by governments for administration of criminal justice aimed at controlling crime and imposing punishment on persons who violate the law.
  • India’s criminal justice system is based on the Indian Penal Code (IPC) enacted in 1860.
  • Article 246 of the Constitution of India places the police, public order, courts, prisons, reformatories and other allied institutions in the State List.
    • However, the Union laws are followed by the Police, Judiciary, and Correctional Institutes, which form the basic organs of the criminal justice system.
• Structure of the CJS: It consists of the four main pillars.
  • Investigation by Police: Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 allows the investigation officer to question anyone who may know about the case and write down their statement.
  • Prosecution of Case by the Prosecutors: Prosecutors charge an accused with a crime and try to show that he/she is guilty in a court of law.
  • Determination of Guilt by the Courts: The court pronounces the sentence using its discretion, considering aggravating and mitigating factors, the offender's background, and the likelihood of their reform.
  • Correction through the Prison System: The imprisonment in India is used for the reformation and rehabilitation of the prisoner through education, labour, vocational training and yoga and meditation.

What are the Challenges Involved in the Criminal Justice System in India?

• Pendency of Cases: As of July 2023, over 5 crore cases were pending across all courts in India.
  • Of them, 87.4% are pending in subordinate courts, 12.4% in High Courts, while nearly 1,82,000 cases have been pending for over 30 years. The Supreme Court had 78,400 pending cases.
• Judicial Vacancies: Despite a longstanding target of 50 judges per million people, India has only 21 judges per million people, laying the foundation for delays.
• Slow Progress in Fastrack Courts: The functioning of fast-track courts has been far from ideal.
  • New courts with the necessary infrastructure and dedicated judges are not set up for fast-track purposes.
  • Instead, existing courts are typically designated as fast-track courts, requiring judges to manage their regular caseloads in addition to these expedited cases.
• Abuse of Power by Police: Police are often accused of unwarranted arrest, unlawful imprisonment, wrongful search, harassment, custodial violence, death etc.
  • In addition, police are continuously acquiring more and more power on the grounds of prevention laws.
• Complex Mechanism: Present day justice mechanisms are too complex and it is completely far from the marginalised people.
  • In a system focused on institutional arrangements rather than building capacity, vulnerable sections of society will inevitably be marginalised.
• Perceived Biases: In comparison to their percentage in the total population, Adivasis, Christians, Dalits, Muslims and Sikhs are all well over-represented in Indian prisons.
• Violations of Human Rights in Prison: In the name of extracting confessions and investigating crimes, authorities use physical force upon the prisoners.
  • Torture is also inflicted on women in the form of custodial rape, molestation and other forms of sexual abuses.

How can the Criminal Justice System in India be Reformed?

• Bail Reforms: “Bail is rule and jail is an exception” is a judicial principle that was laid down by the Supreme Court during a landmark judgment of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand alias Baliya in 1978.
  • In its 268^th Report, the Law Commission of India stressed that urgent measures need to be taken to curtail the length of detention, and concluded that the law relating to bail must be revisited to prevent this.
• Reviving Fastrack Courts: Expeditious disposal of long pending sessions cases should be done to make these courts “truly fast-track”.
• Legal Aid Reform: Training, mentoring and building capacities of young professionals for improving quality of socio-legal services to make CJS more effective.
• Filling Judicial Vacancies: Filling judicial vacancies effectively is crucial for maintaining a functional and fair judicial system. For this, All India Judicial Service (AIJS) can be explored for the recruitment of judges at the level of additional district judges and district judges.
• Application of AI in Criminal Case Management: AI can be used to help judges make decisions about bail, sentencing, and parole.
  • AI can be used to assess the risk of recidivism for offenders.

What Commissions have been set up to Reform CJS?

• National Police Commission (NPC): It recommended that there must be a judicial enquiry in cases of custodial death or rapes.
• Malimath Committee: It recommended that there is a need to have a separate police force for maintaining law and order and crime investigation.
• All India Jail Reforms Committee (Mulla Committee): It emphasised the recruitment of proper and trained staff for the administration of jails and, for this purpose, a correctional service should be established.
• Krishnan Iyer Committee: It recommended the appointment of women staff in the police for handling women and child offenders.

What are Judicial Pronouncements Related to Reformation of CJS?

• Prakash Singh v. Union of India Case, 2006: The Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that a state security commission must be established in each state to keep a check on the work of the police and observe that there is no influence.
• S.P. Anand v. State of Madhya Pradesh Case, 2007: Prisoners have basic rights to a healthy life even though their right to liberty and free movement is restricted.
• State of Gujarat v. High Court of Gujarat Case, 1988: It was held that reasonable wages must be paid to prisoners in jail for the work or labour they have done.
• Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar Case, 1979: Keeping the undertrials in jail for a longer period than their punishment is a clear violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21.
• Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration Case, 1980: The practice of handcuffing is inhuman, unreasonable and harsh, and thus, an accused person must not be handcuffed in the first instance.

Conclusion

The Indian criminal justice system faces challenges such as a large backlog of cases, inefficiency, lack of resources, poor infrastructure, and insufficient training for personnel. However, efforts are being made to reform and improve the system, particularly to ensure that marginalised communities have better access to justice.