After CJI T S Thakur recently lamented government's "inaction" in dealing with the issue of shortages of judges, another Supreme Court judge today said the lawmakers should exhibit a similar "enthusiasm", as they do while creating new laws, in providing required infrastructure for disposal of cases under such new laws.
Justice Jasti Chelameswar put across these points to Minister of State for Finance Jayant Sinha while they both were attending the annual 'Enforcement Day' event organised by the Enforcement Directorate in the national capital here.
Chelameswar said he was taking up the subject here as there is a "debate" and "accusation" going on in the country on the issue of delays in getting decisions from courts.
He said he was specifically addressing the issue to Sinha as he, as the representative of the government at the event, can "only handle it."
"The enthusiasm exhibited by the legislature, be it Parliament or state legislature in making new laws, creating new rights and obligations...The same degree of enthusiasm is not exhibited by the government in creating the appropriate infrastructure.
"If you notice the pattern in law, every new law creates necessary obligations and leads to litigation. Litigation requires fora to adjudicate the rights and obligations but every law does not create a new forum," he said.
The apex court judge said that the jurisdiction (of the new created Act) is "dumped" on some existing forum.
"Take any decision in any state or Union Territory, the enactment under which the District Judge has the jurisdiction is mind boggling. So long as this situation continues it will be difficult for the district judges (to effectively mete out justice)...There is a limit for any systems' ability and capacity.
"However, brilliant, however hardworking, the individual is, if you ask a judge to handle 30 cases a month the efficiency level would be something. You ask the judge to deal with 300 cases you know what happens and what has happened," he said hinting that such a situation lead to pile up of cases.
Chelameswar said it was time "the lawmakers realise that every time they create a new law, they must create necessary provisions, both financial and administrative, for creating and sustaining a forum for adjudication...An independent forum.
"Don't dump this jurisdiction on the same old District Judge who is dealing with joint family partition matters or regular 302 (murder) cases or so on. Create new bodies, give this jurisdiction to new bodies which can exclusively deal with it," he said seeking additional facilities whenever a new law is enacted in the country.
Chelameswar said one has to be logical to find a solution
to mounting and pending litigation in the country.
"I am not saying that the delays are justified. Because there is no point in being rhetorical about it unless we are logical about it and analyse it. I am not saying this (lack of infrastructure) is the only reason that the delays take place.
"There are various other reasons and the forum for discussion of those reasons is not this. This is a forum where this (infrastructure) aspect is required to be taken note of and perhaps, it will, hopefully be taken care of in the future," he said.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Thakur had sought from the government, in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi last week, made a strong pitch for enhancing the number of judges from the present 21,000 to 40,000 to handle the "avalanche" of litigations.
"You cannot shift the entire burden on the judiciary. Nothing has moved since 1987 when the Law Commission had recommended increase in the number of judges from then 10 judges per 10 lakh people to 50," an unusually emotional CJI had said.
(Reopens DEL 29)
Justice Chelameswar, while talking about the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) which the ED enacts in the country, said he was "little amused" as to what was the legislative policy behind this law.
While stating that he was putting this question as a citizen of the country and not as a SC Judge, he asked what was the use of "mundane" offences like culpable homicide not amounting to murder being put under the category of predicate offences for the initiation of money laundering proceedings.
He also asked why the maximum punishment for PMLA offences was only 7 year imprisonment adding that someone who is laundering huge amounts of money should be given a more "rigorous" punishment.
"Is the sentencing policy in tune with aspirations of the law?," he said.
The SC Judge also batted for having some number of staffers in the ED as "permanent cadre" as the agency's work specialised requires a good talent pool.
The ED has almost 90 per cent of its investigators and staff coming to it on deputation at present.
While acknowledging that the conviction rate under "any crime" in the country was "very low", he said economic crimes were not being perpetrated by ordinary but by intelligent and sophisticated criminals.
The problem of establishing guilt in such cases is complex, he noted.
The SC Judge said technology has enabled that crime is committed with greater speed and accuracy.
