I was delighted to read this post in rediff that a trial judge went a long way to play her part in reducing the back-long of the cases, which has really been a stigma on the Indian judicial system.
"Additional District and Sessions Judge Kamini Lau did not mind spending extra hours to finish the cases, pertaining to theft of electricity, claims with various power companies and malfunctioning of the infrastructure", reports Rediff.
Not long back, I had the occasion to write about the pitfalls of delay in judicial redressal, but then it seemed like an issue taken for granted. The monthly report of pending cases in the Supreme Court does not inspire confidence either.
Every once in a blue moon we hear that a judge went out of the way to dispose more cases than the national average. But the point is, are their any incentives for the judges who really take toil to clear the backlog? Is there any mechanism in place to ensure that this takes place at a regular basis, till the time the pendecy is within acceptable limits?
No answer clearly seems to be forthcoming. Blame is transferred by ailing huge vacancies in the judicial lines, lack of proper infrastructure etc. But shifting of this blame game is not for the county as a whole and certainly for the people as well.
It seems quiet inappropriate to me that there should be a question of incentives for the judges who are willing to work more for speedy disposal of cases. This is a classic instance of "duty" and "aspiration" dilemma. Is it judges' duty to ensure speedy disposal of cases by acting in the manner suggested above? Or are these freak instances only part of what our legal system should aspire to aim at? The question of incentives/ rewards arises only when the speedy disposal of cases is an 'aspiration ' and not a part of duty on part of the judges.
ReplyDeletewell Raghav, I really appreciate the fact that you point to the duty aspect on the part of the judiciary. I would have totally agreed with you but for the fact that in real world, this would be viewed in a relative sense and everyone would be able to define their own version of what constitutes their duty and how to administer it.
ReplyDeleteSo I thought why not have a system wherein these personal subjective fallouts are addressed and an objective criteria set in to deal with the issue.