Delayed justice: End complacency as the default option

CINEMA does not create stereotypes, it amplifies lived experience. In the case of the judiciary, images and dialogue continue to lend familiarity to the systemic anomalies. The delay in the delivery of justice is now so normalised that only very unusual instances garner attention — minus the revulsion such absurdity should ideally trigger. In Bihar, it took over 30 years to sentence an 85-year-old man to three years in jail in an attempt-to-murder case. He remembers little about the incident. In UP, after a 27-year trial for criminal intimidation, a wobbly 80-year-old was told to stand in court for a day as punishment. He faithfully attended the hearings. Confession and an appeal for mercy led to the verdict. In Mumbai, an 80-year-old will go to prison for a crime committed 13 years ago.

By 2025, the National Judicial Data Grid reported more than 5.1 crore pending cases, nearly 4.5 crore of these in subordinate courts. A speedy trial is a fundamental right, yet remains symbolic for most undertrials. They comprise over 70% of the prison population. Many have spent more years in jail than the punishment prescribed for their alleged crimes. Delay seems to be the default option of criminal procedure. Hurdles can be expected at every stage -- from the FIR to investigations, filing of the chargesheet, framing of charges, the trial, and the appeal. The fix is known. Courts with the sanctioned strength, police reforms, technology integration, strong anti-corruption measures, hybrid courts, strengthening legal aid and more lok adalats are all doable. The sluggish clean-up adds to the crisis of credibility. A loss of trust in procedures opens a window for corruption.

The apex court has time and again expressed its dismay over the state of affairs. Institutional efficiency needs a more direct and determined intervention.