DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Gurdaspur, Batala lawyers observe two day 'pen-down' strike

The protest was against the Punjab Government’s proposed plan to set up Gram Nyayalayas Act-2008’

  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
Lawyers of the Batala Bar Association submit a memorandum to the Gurdaspur Deputy Commissioner.
Advertisement

Advocates of the Gurdaspur and Batala Bar Associations observed a two-day pen down strike in protest against the Punjab Government’s proposed plan to set up Gram Nyayalayas Act-2008 at the tehsil level across the state. Work in the courts remained paralysed for the second successive day.

Advertisement

Gurdaspur district comprises the Gurdaspur and Batala Bar Associations (BBA). Batala Bar Association president Gurdeep Singh Randhawa claimed the two day strike was complete.

Advertisement

The Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 is an Act of the Parliament enacted for the establishment of village courts for speedy and easy access to the justice system in the rural areas of India. The Act came into force on October 2, 2009. However, due to an assortment of reasons it was not implemented and is sought to be applied now.

Advertisement

The lawyers submitted a memorandum to the Deputy Commissioner (DC) and the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Randhawa said implementing the Act would create unnecessary confusion in the judicial system. “It will neither provide relief to the common man nor will it speed up the resolution of cases. Moreover, Punjab has an elaborate network of courts and most villages are within the range of sub-division or district courts. Hence, there is no need to duplicate the judicial system in the areas where it is already well-established,” he said.

Lawyers contended that the much-hyped “justice at doorstep” concept was being misinterpreted. “The idea that courts should travel to villages is outdated and impractical. ‘Justice at doorstep’ should mean digital access to courts and simplified legal procedures and not physical mobility of courts. Asking judicial officers to hold courts in temporary village settings is not only inefficient, but also derogatory to the dignity of judges. It is totally irrelevant when regular courts are within reach. Actually, a well-orchestrated legal system will be disrupted,” said Randhawa.

Advertisement

The advocates said that there was no demand whatsoever from villages to set up such courts.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts