Justice in shambles

Vijay Sanghvi Delhi

On January 3, 2007,  Santosh Dhanvare, an under-trial, who is below 25 years, pulled out his shoe in anger and hurled it at the lady Judicial Magistrate 1st Class S M Soni when she refused to accept his plea for recording his confession in the theft case registered against him in July 2004. He was  apparently agitated at the postponement of his hearing, thirtieth time to yet another date.

Santosh and Rajesh Mehta were arrested by the Surat Police in July 2004 and lodged in the jail on charges of petty theft. Since then they had appeared in the court for more than thirty times but each time were sent back with a new date for their court trial. More often the prosecution could not produce its witness leading to a new date. Of late even the court appointed lawyer as the two accused had no money to pay for a lawyer who also failed to turn up. On that fateful Wednesday, Santosh expressed his plight and offered to readily make his confession of the theft so that his case could be settled there and then without a new date. But Soni refused to entertain his plea on the grounds that neither the prosecution witnesses were present and nor the court appointed lawyer for him in the court. She posted the case to a new date.

In anger Santosh hurled his shoe at her. The shocked Soni left her seat for her chamber. The policemen came rushing to drag him out from the box and took him back to jail. The senior police officials slapped another case against Santosh for committing an offence against the  magistrate.

Under-trials are brought to the court by an indifferent police escorts. The accused are made to walk to the court in chains in small district towns or in a van along with several others in the metros. The escort does not know the crime of the accused nor does he care to find out... His relationship with the escorted person is totally impersonal. Under-trials are made to sit on grounds with their hands and legs chained and await their turn. As the turn comes, they are led to the box for the accused and face the magistrate. Most often the poor accused or under-trials have no lawyer as they cannot afford money to pay. As you pass the Patiala court or Tis Hajari court, you would come across the familiar site of several chained accused sitting on grounds in the lane reserved for them to wait for their turn. The scene would remind you of the slave bazaars of the eighteenth century when slaves in chains were brought from Africa to Jamaica to work on sugarcane fields for their new masters. They looked healthy as the slave trader had a interest in fetching better price by keeping his commodity look healthy.

The tyrannical system prevailing in the district courts can be felt only when seen and suffered by oneself. Words cannot explain it. The magistrate is the final arbiter. No one can speak out of turn unless called upon. Any attempt to present the case by the self is futile as most presiding officers have their own methods, and often harsh ones, of dealing with such ‘recalcitrant.’

More often magistrates have other pressing engagements or assigned duties that come suddenly. Hence they would not be in position to attend to cases listed for the day in their court. On rare occasions the magistrate would give new dates before attending other duties so that those who were listed for the date would know when they were expected to come. Else they have to make rounds of the court clerk to find out when their case would come up again. With  hundreds crowding up, it is not an easy task. A casual visit to the courts in Patiala House or Tis Hajari in Delhi would bear out