article on judiciary

Judicial Reforms: Taking small steps at a time.
-by Sachin Upadhyay (Advocate, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench;
Judicial reforms or for that matter reforms in any other institution cannot be just ascribed to the system from the external world, it has to be cultivated from within. Yes, external world or forces may recommend reforms, get them incorporated into the recipient system and at times force the reforms to the system concerned. However, logically it is the constituents of that particular system who are to carry forward and live up to the spirit of the reforms so attributed/forced to them. Now, when we take reforms in judicial system as a subject it is expedient for us to first ponder upon the following questions:
1. Why do we actually need reformation in the judicial system?
2. What are the issues that need to be handled with an updated point of view?
3. What if we let the system run in its subsisting character maintaining the status quo?
4. Who is going to benefit out of the concerned reformative changes?
5. At what cost, the reforms will be attributed to the system?
Now, answering these precisely and respectively is both an abstract as well as a very tough task. However, the underlying rationale would go as following:
1. To maximise the happiness of all the stake holders in the system.
2. To build capacity, ability and adaptability in the constituents of the system.
3. To fill up the trust-deficit amongst the common citizenry and the judiciary.
4. To ensure cost-time-efforts effectiveness at all levels.
It is pertinent to answer here as to what does the word constituent here essentially refers to. When I use this word I am referring to the Judicial officers at all levels, Court staff at all levels and Advocates working with different judicial committees at all levels.  Hence, bluntly a constituent of a judicial system is anyone who derives financial incentives of any sort from different governments simply by being a part of the judicial system concerned.  Reform is always directed keeping in sight a target audience which is to benefit out of the changes that lead the institution in a better direction. Undoubtedly, that audience would be the whole citizenry of the nation inclusive of the constituents of the system along-with private legal practitioners professing litigation in different courts of the nation.  Hence, so far we stand settled on the following two points:
1. It is the employees (constituents) of the judicial system who are to effectively implement the reforms being recommended to the system.
2. It is a collection of lawyers, judges, staff members of the system along-with the general citizenry of the nation who are to derive benefits out of the reforms.
Judiciary in our country has always been kept on the highest pedestal when it comes to protecting the interests of the citizens of the country. It is undoubtedly so far been the most refine, responsible, active, functional institution of the nation. It is the judiciary of the nation that works throughout the year to ensure that constitutional provisions are upheld, executive arbitrariness does not go unchecked, fundamental rights stand guaranteed and protected, interest of the nation are secured, harmony and peace among the masses prevails. It is repository of our inbuilt faith in democratic principles, highest regard for constitutional mandates and firm believe in peaceful settlement of disputes.
In the write-up I would choose not to go into the details of which committee recommended what to bring about a change in some random past years. I would take the liberty to directly hit on the basic functional approaches through which I believe reforms have been induced in different systems around the world.  As generally perceivable we take judicial reform in a totally different manner than how we take administrative reforms and reforms related to other forms of governance. In a Judicial reform, the scheme flows from top to down, much like we follow judicial precedents.  Subordinate judiciary that forms the very platform where a litigant encounters the judicial system for the very first time is not provided its long due and adequate attention. I am going to take the following issues one by one and suggest a different approach to look at these issues:
1. Heavy pendency of cases:
Approximately more than 38 million cases are pending in different courts of the country. Now that is a data that makes good for an eye-catching news article but when we are to deliberate upon as to how to reduce these numbers, we have to look into it with the third eye. This data is to be processed and reduced to numbers that give an optimistic sense of reformation. There should be a commissioned project wherein number of pending cases are classified under the following tabular form:

At the National level:
S.No State/UT Court Number of cases pending. Nature of cases pending (Civil/Criminal) Total number of  judges available
1. New Delhi Supreme Court Civil:
Criminal:
others:
High Court
Subordinate Courts
2.

At the State level:
S.No District Number of cases pending. Nature of cases pending (Civil/Criminal) Total number  of judges available
1 Civil:
Criminal:
others:
2

Once we get the data in the above tabular form, data needs to be processed more flowing down the hierarchy at the district level:
S.No. Tehsil Number of cases pending. Nature of cases pending (Civil/Criminal) Concerned Judicial officer
1 Civil:
Criminal:
others:
2
Dealing with the situation with small numbers at the local level is more feasible as it first of all washes off the pessimism that larger numbers in data bring with them to our thought process. Furthermore it would be easier to attach responsibility and accountability to officers at the local level who are to take care of their respective areas and produce results to tackle the pendency. There should be some intensive based programs initiated also to facilitate the districts and states who perform well in this regard.
2. Down to Top approach for reformation:
The problem apparently is not that efficient efforts are not made to bring about the change in our judicial system. Problem is that the top down effect has nothing substantial to offer when it comes to judicial reforms. The Supreme Court and the High Courts have an established procedure of working. The litigant generally is not introduced to these courts at the first instance in Civil & Criminal cases. His/her first encounter with the judicial system occurs at the subordinate court level and hence, it is expedient to make sure that subordinate courts work well. Executive judicial committees at the local level must be established, strengthened and promoted to hold monthly meetings with lawyers, judges and staff members and propose changes that may provide convenience to all the stake holders. Subordinate judiciary must be given wide powers at the district level to deal with matters in its jurisdiction in a way that would yield maximum results ofcourse working in conformity with established laws and precedents. The subordinate courts must have discretion to deal with procedural aspect of the litigation. Independence with strength is what should be the hallmark of Indian judiciary at all levels. Subordinate Judiciary is to be given its long due status and is not to be seen as the lowest  in hierarchy but the first setup of courts to which a person is introduced if caught in a legal issue and dealt accordingly.
3. Independent Local Judicial Committees: 
There should be a committee of Judges, senior lawyers, legal experts, academicians which should monitor the working of different courts and grade different judges on the basis of their performance in the court. The recommendations or suggestions so produced by the committee shall be considered for recording the ACRs of the officers. The committee shall further conduct surveys, workshops, trainings at the local level of staff members, judges and lawyers to ensure that over all qualitative improvement in the courts is not only possible but prominently visible as well.  This will not only ensure social audit of the working of our courts but also give a participative sense to several other groups of individuals in the judicial process of the nation.
4. Role of law students with the judiciary:
One thing which our judicial system is very conveniently ignoring is the availability of a huge work force in law students. Demographically, India is at its youngest best and carries the power to meet diverse challenges coming on its way through collective consciousness and efforts of its vast youth population. It is the youth of our nation who is playing prominent role in every area of our mixed economical setup. Judicial fraternity should not be the one that goes untouched and unaffected by this positive force.  If the study of law is not to remain an empty vessel, it is required that we modify our concepts of what constitutes justice, according to our nation's situation. If development and growth is to be inclusive, the law student needs to break out of his air-conditioned classroom and take up the task of ensuring quick and effective justice by assisting the courts and the judges. Law students can identify a legal need, assist supervising attorneys, research the relevant law, and enlist classmates to induce updated professionalism in the judicial system. It is a win-win for both parties; the students gain the benefit of practical experience to inform their academic coursework and the under-served litigants get special attention and proper guidance at a limited expense. Running pilot schemes with law students taking up part-time voluntary roles as “community legal companions” can help in figuring out to what extent the pressure is lowered. The law isn't always "brain surgery". It is often far from it and much more could be done to help ordinary people demystify