Justice in India through rural courts

This article discusses the functioning of courts in villages and the legal system in India. With the receding quality of the justice system in rural India, the top court's can be considered as a ray of hope.

Hyderabad:Mahatma Gandhi strongly believed that the key to India’s fortune lies in the development of its rural areas. During the seven decades of Indian Republic, the spirit of decentralisation is nowhere to be seen. Though the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2009 has been introduced to provide quick justice to villagers, the implementation is lacklustre.

According to the National Productivity Council, only 11 states have given out notifications for filling up the village courts during 2009-18.

Last year, the National Federation of Societies for Fast Justice had filed a PIL about only 204 functional village courts in working condition out of the proposed 320.

The Supreme Tribunal has issued several directives as a part of the lawsuit filed against village courts, which alleged that the rural poor have become victims of the current judicial system and that the courts were not in accord with Article 39-A of the Constitution.

The three-member bench comprising of NV Ramana, Sanjeev Khanna and Krishna Murari had issued a directive that the states which did not initiate the set-up of village courts must release necessary notifications within 4 weeks' time. It has made it clear that the Chief Justice of High Courts should consult with the respective state governments to expedite the process of setting up courts and personnel recruitment.

According to the previous directives, the top court has considered Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Telangana, West Bengal, Uttarakhand and Odisha not producing affidavits as a serious offence. With the apex court taking up the case seriously, there is a ray of hope about rural justice being prevailed.

India has long had this concept of the village and its law. Rachabanda or the resolution of disputes by elderly gentlemen in the villages was considered a lawful practice. It gave the villagers a reason to abstain from approaching the court of law. Four decades ago, 30,000 legal panels were established with the aim of delivering justice to the villages.

Three decades ago, when the NTR government introduced Mandal Praja Parishad bill in the Assembly, the Congress government had voted against it. Though NTR got the bill passed in 1995, it got rejected within one year.

The Manmohan Singh government had introduced the concept of village courts to ensure justice to all sections of the population. Though there were reports about 5,000 village courts going to be established in the first phase, the former Chief Minister of AP, YSR, had decided against it.

Fifty-five village courts in Telangana and 82 in Andhra Pradesh have been finally established but there was no further improvement. The rural population will be benefited if this system of decentralizing the legal services takes the right shape.

In July 2019, the Supreme Court had struck off a case filed in 1979 about milk adulteration. The case which was first filed in magistrate court had then proceeded to session court, high court and then to the apex court. This way, the case was dragged on for four decades.

There are thousands of such cases pending in the courts, with a shortage of staff in subordinate courts.

The legal system in India works in such a way that the petitioner loses all his income in the process of his legal battle.

With 70 per cent rural population and half of them being underprivileged, justice remains a mirage in our country. The law stipulates that courts operating in accordance with the law principles need not comply with the rule of evidence and that the civil cases can be resolved within six months.

The Law Commission in its 1986 report, noted that the establishment of courts in accordance with jurisdiction can reduce the burden on higher courts. If courts were set up in nearly 50,000 blocks across the nation, it would be a respite to the rural and urban poor.

The Supreme Tribunal had also upheld the argument that the cost of establishing and maintaining courts should be revised to date and that the central and state governments must share the costs. As the Right to Justice is a fundamental right of every citizen, the Supreme Court’s orders must be welcomed.

READ: Pak national held for entering India illegally in Gujarat