Indian Judicial System

An incisive and comprehensive view of India’s legal process and its key issues India has the second-largest legal profession in the world, but the systemic delays and chronic impediments of its judicial system inspire little confidence in the common person. In India’s Legal System, renowned constitutional expert and senior Supreme Court lawyer Fali S. Nariman explores the possible reasons. While realistically appraising the criminal justice system and the performance of legal practitioners, he elaborates on the different aspects of contemporary practice, such as public interest litigation, judicial review and activism. In lucid, accessible language, Nariman discusses key social issues such as inequality and affirmative action, providing real cases as illustrations of the on-ground situation. This frank and thought-provoking book offers valuable insights into India’s judicial system and maps a possible road ahead to make justice available to all.

Contains 25 Papers And Two Documents Which Book At Various Aspects Of Indian Judicial System At All Levels-Judicial Activism-Appointment Of Judges-Independence Of Judiciary-Rule Of Law Etc.

Judicial institutions evolved in India in the context of India’s social, economic and political conditions and because of the reception of legal concepts and institutions known to English and Scottish judges, lawyers and administrators. Modern Indian judiciary bears the hallmarks of its genesis and evolution during the British rule but it has progressively gone for beyond the colonial confines after the republican Constitution came into force. The theme of fundamental Rights and the role of the Supreme Court and the High Courts as vigilant custodians of fundamental rights are at the heart of India’s constitutional democracy. We owe a deep debt of gratitude to our apex judicature, the higher judiciary and the country’s bar in the evolution of the common law of the Constitution. It constitutes by common consent a remarkable chapter in our national life. H v H The Constitution of India is not the last word in human wisdom, but it was certainly a glorious achievement of national consensus and national commitment. The higher Indian judiciary can be said to have broadly fulfilled its constitutional ethos. There have been aberrations, notably during the Emergency and in some cases, of overstating and unduly enlarging the scope of judicial power. More seriously, there are grave and growing problems of inefficient case management, arrears, delays, corruption and incompetence. Those issues have to be addressed urgently, effectively and comprehensively if the Indian judiciary is to emerge as a fit instrument for Rule of Law for the teeming millions in the largest democracy in the world and if the Indian judiciary is to flourish in the twenty-first century holding its head high as an institution of freedom, liberty and balance, with a commitment to the constitutional goals and aspirations of We the People of India.

""Aims to analyse whether unwarranted disparity existed in rape sentencing in India, which anecdotal work of other scholars had pointed to"--Provided by publisher"--

We, the people of India, have adopted a written Constitution which has created an independent judiciary having the power of judicial review. While exercising this power, the judiciary not only acts as a guardian of the Constitution and its values, but also protects us from illegality, arbitrariness, malafides and corruption of other organs of the State. Therefore, in order to perform these functions the judiciary in India, since the adoption of the Constitution has been enjoying the highest degree of independence and has been held least accountable. This system has been adopted in the Constitution with the objective to achieve the concept of Justice as enshrined in the Preamble. It is pertinent to note that initially the judiciary had responded appropriately to achieve this object but, in due course of time, the Indian Judiciary under the guise of judicial activism, has shifted its focus in addition to delivering Justice, to governing the nation and its policies.

In modern computer era we have computerised everything including the medical profession but why we have not updated our Indian judiciary system alone so far into digital model? Even after the Supreme Court of India had set up a special committee and the committee had given its recommendations during the year 2005 itself and the government also spent during 2011-2015 Rs 640 crs for phase I and Rs 1078 crs for computerisation for creating infra for implementation of e-courting system out of total financial outlay of Rs 1630 crs, allocated money for this. But why it had not been fully implemented is the million dollar questions raised by the public?. Whether it is because of self-interest of the Judiciary or the advocates or court administration?, in spite of more than 3.20 crores are pending before all Indian Courts for decades together? Failure of our part to digitalisation of the court cases records and procedure so far the judicial industry is very much affected due to this corona lockdown period. It is a major setback for judiciary since the “justice delayed means justice denied” How long our judiciary will keep silent for not opening the courts due to corona like virus effect., God only knows the fact. Among the four pillars of our Constitution except Judiciary all the three viz.,Government, Administration and Press are being working for 24X7 , but judiciary is closed its office. In order to overcome this situation I bought up this book “E- Courting and Modernisation of e-judiciary in India “which includes the e- filing procedure before SC & HCs and District courts and SC guidelines regarding the implementation of the e- courting system etc for the benefit of Legal fraternity to switch over immediately in to digital courting and to reduce the pending cases and provide quick justice to our needy poor in time and render them quick justice. Jai Hind.

Examines whether the Indian Supreme Court can produce progressive social change and improve the lives of the relatively disadvantaged.