Recently, a group of experts under the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) voiced their concerns regarding the apparent slow progress regarding reforms in India’s criminal justice system. The principal goal is to ensure speedy justice. Established on October 12, 1993, as per the Protection of Human Rights Act provisions, the NHRC is an independent statutory body, which was later amended in 2006.
Criminal Justice System in India – An Overview
The term “Criminal Justice System” refers to government agencies responsible for enforcing laws, adjudicating crimes and changing criminal behaviour. As a major instrument of social control, it broadly encompasses three primary reform sets: Judicial, Prison and Police reforms.
The key objectives of these reforms include preventing crime, punishing and rehabilitating transgressors and criminals, compensating victims whenever possible, maintaining societal law and order, and effectively deterring future criminal activities.
The Legal Framework for Criminal Jurisprudence in India
India’s official criminal code, the Indian Penal Code (IPC), was drafted in 1860 based on recommendations from the first law commission of India from 1834 under Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay’s chairmanship. Additionally, the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), effective from April 1, 1974, is the primary legislation that governs the administration of substantial criminal law in India.
Persistent Issues within the Criminal Justice System
Despite reform efforts, several significant issues persist within the criminal justice system. These include a large number of pending cases in the Supreme Court, High Courts, and district courts; a high count of undertrial prisoners; the delay in implementing police reforms; corruption, workload and police accountability; and the continued use of colonial-era laws.
Proposed Solutions for the Criminal Justice System
Several suggestions have been proposed to address these persistent issues. These include deleting some IPC provisions and resorting to the law of Torts for redressal, as is the practice in England; digitising documents for faster investigations and trials; increasing legal awareness among police personnel; increasing police personnel and station numbers relative to complaint numbers; and including social workers and psychologists in the criminal justice system.
Additionally, greater focus should be placed on victim’s rights and smart policing. There should also be an examination of the rate of police officials’ non-compliance of law and conviction.
Implementing the Malimath Committee’s Recommendations
Another significant solution includes the implementation of recommendations proposed by the Malimath Committee in 2000. These encompass enhancing the rights of the accused by providing information in all regional languages, separating the investigation wing from law and order, increasing the number of judges and courts, enacting separate witness protection laws, and reducing court vacations due to the long pendency of cases.
