Home | Arts
India can boast of an excellent and well defined legal system since ancient times. The ‘World Court’ which is the highest seat of law where disputes between nations are heard and verdicts delivered by an eminent multi nation jury recognises this fact with a rare honour. It has an imposing statue of ‘Manu’ with the inscription ‘Manu – The Ancient Hindu Law Giver’ adorning the entrance of its main building. This is in recognition of ‘Manu Smriti’ an exhaustive treatise covering civil, criminal, political and military law with clear interpretations compiled single-handedly by Manu. The importance of this book can be gauged by the fact that it was among the earliest works to be translated by the British to understand native law and legal system. While much of Manu’s laws may sound archaic, irrelevant or even unjust today, it remains the first ever authoritative work on law, a mammoth effort to define and codify law and lay down well defined statutes and provisions during a time when justice was meted out arbitrarily by the King. Indian laws have a strong British influence and American effect to a lesser extent. While laws have to be respected per se and accorded high status, they should be reviewed from time to time to assess their relevance and efficacy in a changing society. We may need to exercise great caution in this exercise but the fact remains that laws like all other aspects of life have to be revisited and modernised periodically for them to be contemporary and meaningful. Indian laws are broadly classified as Criminal, Constitional and Civil laws, while the first two are uniform to all citizens of the country, civil laws vary according to the community of the individual. Civil laws cover marriage, divorce, adoption, succession rights etc. As a multi religious and secular nation respecting all religions it was decided to allow different religious groups to be governed by their customary laws when it comes to their personal lives. This has been criticised by a section of people who feel that every country should be ruled by a homogeneous set of laws or a uniform civil code even in matters regulating the personal lives of its citizens as is the practice being followed in the rest of the world and there should be no differentiation on any basis. The two sayings ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ and 'It is of fundamental importance, that justice should not only be done but manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done’ capture the spirit of good jurisprudence better than anything else. ‘Justice’ like many other things in this world would become meaningless if it is not dispensed in time and reaches the petitioner after he has undergone needless suffering, trauma and a long wait. A painful long wait cannot be compensated even if separate compensation is awarded for the ‘pain and mental agony caused’ by the courts. If the first saying emphasizes the need for speedy justice the second saying underlines the need for making it evident and well known that justice was indeed dispensed, that the aggrieved was redressed and the culprits were punished or penalized in a manner befitting their crime. This has a two way effect, while the faith and confidence levels in the judicial system is strengthened, it also serves as a deterrent to potential wrong doers sending them a warning of the consequences and that no one can go Scot-free after committing a crime. Open courts and carrying our sentences in full public view as in the Gulf countries may be viewed as extreme examples of such transparency, but it does serve as a powerful deterrent. The media could play a crucial role in letting the world know of the verdict of the courts and assure the public at large that real justice was meted out and the guilty were punished. It is true that while reviewing specific judicial verdicts there are comments from the people that the punishment was not strong enough and the culprits got away lightly and this may not send the fear wave among wrong doers, people feel that some laws need more teeth to make them effective. This however is not something that could be reviewed by common people and is best left to legal experts. The most common grievance however is not so much about the quality of justice but the long wait and inordinate delay in receiving it. This is a serious issue that makes true the saying about delayed justice and makes people apprehensive of seeking justice from courts and resort to third party mediation or out of court settlements. While mutual dialog and compromise are desirable steps to settle disputes, it should happen out of common consent and not out of fear of delayed justice in the courts. Insufficient number of courts, non-availability of judges and location of courts in cities that are far away from where the litigants are located are cited as reasons for the huge backlog in pending cases before the courts. The judiciary is no doubt seized by the issue of clearing the pending cases and is trying to improve the situation by appointing fast track courts to try cases that call for immediate redressal and increase the number of courts in the country. Steps like doing away with the old law that required that any hospital should treat an accident victim only after an FIR (First Information Report) is made in a police station which led to loss of precious time and the need for strong evidence in the case of dowry harassment or other crimes against women are welcome changes and reflect the human face of Indian law. The recent legislation that judges need to declare their assets like Ministers or government officials is a healthy step and would help in enhancing their image and credibility with the public. Link: http://veerakeralam.info/article/504.html
latest daily weekly articles abut happening issues in Kerala in Malayalam also self motivating articles and real stories
Article Source:- Link Building
Please Rate this Article
5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5
Not yet Rated
