Law Commission recommended India apply standard for wrongful prosecution, in keeping with international promises, but Parliament hasn’t paid heed to it.
Peter Manuel's ‘Cassette Culture’ showed the booming Bhakti music during the '80s and '90s when Anoop Jalota, Gulshan Kumar achieved success by singing the sanitised Bhajans.
Economists say there are weaknesses in India’s GDP data. But statisticians claim the accusations are based on flawed understanding, saying while GDP has problems, the economists are looking in the wrong places.
Gopal Vaidya has done well to point out the case of film actor Salman Khan for highlighting the faultlines of Indian judicial system. True and undeniable. But at the same time, I’ve often pointed out such cases that Jessica Lal, who was murdered in Tamarind Court, a popular bar-cum-restaurant New Delhi where the crime was committed. Though the venue was full of customers— men and women, nobody witnessed the accused committing the crime. Those who witnessed declined to testify.
Strange!
In case of the film actor, the crime was committed at dead of night in a jungle. Nonetheless there were eye witnesses to testify the case in trial court. The witnesses were very tenacious in their statement to support the case. No less strange!
I had inquired into a case of wrongful detention of a tribal man who suffered in jail for about 7 years in Ranchi, then Bihar in 1984. He had collected some firewood from the forests close to his home in Khunti Subdivision, now a full-fledged district of Jharkhand State. He was produced in the CJM’s court from custody on few occasions only. Thereafter, he was never produced in the court. The trial didn’t begin even because police did not submit any inquiry report.
These were some of the facts related the arrest of the accused I had collected and submitted for onward transmission to Union Home Ministry which had ordered an inquiry. I had no knowledge for rest of the unfortunate man, an Oraon [sorry, I forget his name] . I was then in Bihar’s Education Department. Strangely, I never knew why I was picked for an inquiry!
I felt that he was innocent and in an insensitive system, he was made to suffer.
How come that Jessica Lall who was murdered by a politician’s son in a bar-cum restaurant full of customers none of whom saw the crime being committed?
And lo and behold! a black-buck was shot at dead of night and there were eye witnesses for the crime to testify in the trial court.
Hope Gopal Vaidya will appreciate the case before making a biased observation as he has done.
Remember it took more than a decade for the shooting of the black-buck case to come to a conclusion. How is it practical to protected witnesses for decades? Since the conviction rate in India is so low, this proposal will simply let criminals loose on the society. In America the conviction rate is well above 95% and the vast majority of the cases are resolved within 1 year. Even in a high profile case, the rapists and killers of Nirbhaya sit comfortably in jail because the Supreme Court isn’t satisfied with one sitting and has no time for another sitting. Speeding up the delivery of justice is critical and of far greater importance because it keeps the case fresh and reduces the likelihood of witness tampering or witnesses dying or forgetting.
Many well meaning people educated in the west simply do not understand the functioning (or lack of functioning) of India’s legal system. In India, it takes more than a decade to convict anybody. By that time, witnesses are dead, gone or bribed. The conviction rates are abysmal. What this article proposes will amount to giving money to a large number of criminals or force them to be released into society. Remember that it took more than 10 years to convict Salman Khan in a simple case because he was able to create endless delays. Once convicted his conviction was overturned that very day. This story is repeated, ad nauseum, in cases like Jayalalitha, Sukh Ram, Ansal brothers, and uncountable others. Now these were people with money and the ability to manage the docket in the courts to ensure that they got a quick hearing from a favorable judge. But this is what our justice system will look like for all cases, if this proposal were to ever be accepted.
Gopal Vaidya has done well to point out the case of film actor Salman Khan for highlighting the faultlines of Indian judicial system. True and undeniable. But at the same time, I’ve often pointed out such cases that Jessica Lal, who was murdered in Tamarind Court, a popular bar-cum-restaurant New Delhi where the crime was committed. Though the venue was full of customers— men and women, nobody witnessed the accused committing the crime. Those who witnessed declined to testify.
Strange!
In case of the film actor, the crime was committed at dead of night in a jungle. Nonetheless there were eye witnesses to testify the case in trial court. The witnesses were very tenacious in their statement to support the case. No less strange!
I had inquired into a case of wrongful detention of a tribal man who suffered in jail for about 7 years in Ranchi, then Bihar in 1984. He had collected some firewood from the forests close to his home in Khunti Subdivision, now a full-fledged district of Jharkhand State. He was produced in the CJM’s court from custody on few occasions only. Thereafter, he was never produced in the court. The trial didn’t begin even because police did not submit any inquiry report.
These were some of the facts related the arrest of the accused I had collected and submitted for onward transmission to Union Home Ministry which had ordered an inquiry. I had no knowledge for rest of the unfortunate man, an Oraon [sorry, I forget his name] . I was then in Bihar’s Education Department. Strangely, I never knew why I was picked for an inquiry!
I felt that he was innocent and in an insensitive system, he was made to suffer.
How come that Jessica Lall who was murdered by a politician’s son in a bar-cum restaurant full of customers none of whom saw the crime being committed?
And lo and behold! a black-buck was shot at dead of night and there were eye witnesses for the crime to testify in the trial court.
Hope Gopal Vaidya will appreciate the case before making a biased observation as he has done.
Remember it took more than a decade for the shooting of the black-buck case to come to a conclusion. How is it practical to protected witnesses for decades? Since the conviction rate in India is so low, this proposal will simply let criminals loose on the society. In America the conviction rate is well above 95% and the vast majority of the cases are resolved within 1 year. Even in a high profile case, the rapists and killers of Nirbhaya sit comfortably in jail because the Supreme Court isn’t satisfied with one sitting and has no time for another sitting. Speeding up the delivery of justice is critical and of far greater importance because it keeps the case fresh and reduces the likelihood of witness tampering or witnesses dying or forgetting.
Many well meaning people educated in the west simply do not understand the functioning (or lack of functioning) of India’s legal system. In India, it takes more than a decade to convict anybody. By that time, witnesses are dead, gone or bribed. The conviction rates are abysmal. What this article proposes will amount to giving money to a large number of criminals or force them to be released into society. Remember that it took more than 10 years to convict Salman Khan in a simple case because he was able to create endless delays. Once convicted his conviction was overturned that very day. This story is repeated, ad nauseum, in cases like Jayalalitha, Sukh Ram, Ansal brothers, and uncountable others. Now these were people with money and the ability to manage the docket in the courts to ensure that they got a quick hearing from a favorable judge. But this is what our justice system will look like for all cases, if this proposal were to ever be accepted.