Font size:
Print
Criminal Justice System in India: Urgent Challenges, Bold Reforms, and the Way Forward
Criminal Justice System in India
Context: Former CJI N.V. Ramana in a symposium remarked that “the process of criminal justice administration has become the punishment” highlighting India’s urgent criminal justice crisis. With rising pendency, arbitrary arrests, and erosion of individual liberty, the need for systemic reforms has become a pressing issue in present times.
What are the challenges in the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in India?
The discourse of “process as punishment”
- The phrase reflects the situations where prolonged trials and bail denials substitute for conviction. UAPA and similar laws amplify this, creating space for state overreach with liberty being sacrificed to procedural delays.
- The Umar Khalid case exemplifies how stringent provisions (Section 43D(5)) and deferential judiciary blur lines between dissent and terrorism.
- Accused/Undertrials: Undertrials constitute around 75% of all the prisoners (Prisoner Statistics India, 2022), resulting in ¬130% occupancy rate of prisons. Furthermore, the conviction rate in IPC crimes is below 50%, and under UAPA often ¬2-3%.
- Judiciary: Case pendency at ¬5 crore (Economic Survey 2023-24). Vacancies (33% in HCs, 25% in lower courts), complex procedures, and high litigation costs erode public trust.
- Police: Poor training, politicisation, and delayed investigations cause wrongful incarceration. The Menon Committee highlighted the lack of scientific investigation methods.
- Victims/Public: Low conviction rates weaken deterrence. Victims suffer secondary trauma due to procedural delays and lack of witness protection.
- Prosecutors: Accountable to executive, not courts, leading to weak representation and state overreach, as seen in the Umar Khalid bail denials under UAPA.
What reforms are needed to strengthen the system?
- Following “Bail, Not Jail” as the norm (State of Rajasthan vs. Balchand 1977 Case), through a liberal interpretation of Article 21.
- Victim participation, witness protection, and sentencing guidelines, as recommended by Malimath Committee (2003).
- Comprehensive CJS Code, training of police, and separation of investigation from law-and-order duties, as advocated by Madhav Menon Committee (2007) and Prakash Singh case.
- Law Commission Reports (239th, 277th) Urged bail reforms, fast-track courts, and technology use in trials.
- Economic Survey 2022-23 suggested increasing judicial capacity, digitisation, and alternate dispute resolution to cut pendency.
- National Legal Services Authority (NALSA): CJI Ramana stressed the role of legal aid for undertrials and modernisation of prisons.
- The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs has recommended electronic tagging of prisoners or accused individuals.
