70 Years Of Indian Judiciary | Opinion: Our Courts Need To Be More Welcoming, Accessible, Purpose Driven

Indians largely tend to shy away from the very idea바카라 웹사이트of litigation. The tales told by those who see it up close will not encourage the rest: inordinate delays, multiple appearances, and the whole bureaucratic tangle starting from the filing of a petition until the final judgment. Enough to leave a바카라 웹사이트lay person intimidated. But while navigating the judicial process is a harrowing experience in itself, there are more material reasons that would dissuade potential litigants from approaching the courts: the state of court infrastructure.

Anyone who has visited바카라 웹사이트a public institution can testify how infrastructure plays a key role in ensuring the quality of service delivery.바카라 웹사이트Courts are no exception. We collected data in a nationwide survey of 665 district courts, including바카라 웹사이트feedback from 6,650 litigants,바카라 웹사이트to put together evidence on the quality of India라이브 바카라 judicial infrastructure. The conclusion is clear:바카라 웹사이트our courts need large-scale improvements to make them more welcoming, accessible and purpose-driven. Here, we chalk out how a day in court for a litigant looks like in most parts of India using this primary data. A handful of readers who have already encountered the system would empathise, but for the majority, who have never had occasion to visit a district court in India, this could be an eye-opener.

Navigation

‘Approaching a court’바카라 웹사이트requires, literally, getting there. A well-networked, economical, accessible public transport system is essential. The better part: about 80바카라 웹사이트per cent바카라 웹사이트of India라이브 바카라 district court complexes are accessible via public transport,바카라 웹사이트including buses.바카라 웹사이트(Tripura, Sikkim, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Gujarat, West Bengal, Bihar, Nagaland, J&K and Odisha are among the worst performers바카라 웹사이트here.) For those using private vehicles, 81바카라 웹사이트per cent바카라 웹사이트of these complexes have designated parking facilities. This is not trivial: of바카라 웹사이트all litigants interviewed, less than half (43바카라 웹사이트per cent) relied on public transport to reach their designated courts. This prompts the question: doesn’t difficulty of access and/or last-mile connectivity itself make justice, literally, more remote?

Things do not improve after바카라 웹사이트you reach: finding one라이브 바카라 way within a court complex can be daunting for a newcomer. Only 133 out of 665 district courts (or 23 per cent) have guide maps at the entry point, and only 300 have helpdesks. Guide maps include signages that direct a person to important areas of the complex:바카라 웹사이트courtrooms, the registry, the filing department, the canteen, waiting areas, the fire escape, and so on. Daily users such as advocates, court staff and judges are바카라 웹사이트familiar with all that, but a new user will almost certainly be lost in the absence of proper signage. Ideally, there should be signages in multiple languages, including the local language and English. A helpdesk would be a welcome substitute/addition to signages,바카라 웹사이트but only about half the complexes have them. Larger states performed especially poorly on this metric. In West Bengal, not even one court complex had guide maps, and only one had a helpdesk; in Rajasthan, only three바카라 웹사이트out of 35 had guide maps and 6/35바카라 웹사이트had helpdesks; in UP, only 6/74 had guide maps or helpdesks; Bihar, Jharkhand and Maharashtra fare low on navigation support too. Chandigarh, Kerala and Delhi were the best.

The corridors and halls of court complexes tend to be overcrowded with litigants, advocates, police personnel et al—there are limited or no designated waiting areas and related facilities바카라 웹사이트for this mass of humanity. Only a little over half the court complexes surveyed바카라 웹사이트(361/665)바카라 웹사이트had waiting areas. Large states failed on this count too, with Bihar (6/38), Rajasthan (5/35) and West Bengal (6/23) ranking the lowest.바카라 웹사이트About 4,602 litigants바카라 웹사이트(69 per cent of those surveyed) testified to this abysmal state of infrastructure, with even바카라 웹사이트basic seating not available.

Hygiene

Our courts perform especially poorly here. Shockingly, 100 court complexes around India do not even have washrooms for women.바카라 웹사이트Andhra Pradesh (9/13), Odisha (18/30), Rajasthan (10/35) 바카라 웹사이트and Assam (16/27) were the worst offenders. It is possible that female court staff has access to some facilities, but surveyors could not locate facilities designated for public use. Where present, they were often not USAble, unclean and/or without essential facilities like running water.바카라 웹사이트Among courts바카라 웹사이트that had gender-segregated washrooms,바카라 웹사이트only 266 were fully functioning바카라 웹사이트with good upkeep. Goa, Jharkhand, UP and Mizoram had the least number of courts with functional washrooms. Almost half바카라 웹사이트the surveyed litigants complained about lack of running water, then flush facility and liquid soap. Imagine the plight of a litigant with no access to good hygienic facilities while waiting바카라 웹사이트long hours for a case to be called up. Ambitious schemes such as Swachh Nyayalayas (and Swachh Bharat)바카라 웹사이트clearly have a long way to go.

Inclusivity

All kinds of people access courts, including persons with special needs, such as older litigants, persons with disabilities, pregnant women, and so on. Any institution that seeks to be accessible to a diverse audience must be necessarily prepared to accommodate, and make comfortable, everyone. This means, for example, having basic features such as ramps or lifts for persons with motor issues. Only 27바카라 웹사이트per cent바카라 웹사이트(180/665) had ramps or lifts at the entry and within the courts. A바카라 웹사이트basic feature for visually challenged persons would be notices in Braille, and tactile pavements:바카라 웹사이트only 2바카라 웹사이트per cent바카라 웹사이트courts had such features. And only 11바카라 웹사이트per cent바카라 웹사이트(73 courts) had separate washrooms for persons with disabilities. It라이브 바카라 an unfortunate state of affairs for temples of justice that proclaim to treat all persons equally. The court complex in Chandigarh stands out as a model in this regard, as one that provides all three facilities.

Beyond barrier-free access, court complexes must also have other facilities:바카라 웹사이트ATMs, bank branches, canteens, first-aid services, police booths, post offices, notaries, stamp vendors, typists, oath commissioners and photocopiers. Only 39바카라 웹사이트per cent바카라 웹사이트courts had all these facilities within the complex or in the vicinity.

Overall, the바카라 웹사이트data paints a deplorable picture.바카라 웹사이트Inter alia, it reveals that eastern states—Bihar, Manipur, Nagaland, West Bengal, Jharkhand—are performing poorly (Meghalaya is an outlier, comparing with Chandigarh, Delhi바카라 웹사이트and바카라 웹사이트Kerala). Detailed statistics바카라 웹사이트can be found in the report, Building Better Courts바카라 웹사이트(2019). If district courts are in this state, imagine courts lower down the hierarchy,바카라 웹사이트such as munsiffs’ and judicial magistrates’ courts. This reflects lack of accountability among judicial and executive stakeholders:바카라 웹사이트high court judges in charge of district courts;바카라 웹사이트district and sessions judges;바카라 웹사이트and the departments of law, planning and finance at both the central and state levels. Indian courts have miles and miles to go before they can claim to offer true, accessible and equal justice to all.바카라 웹사이트And for a true reckoning, count physical infrastructure along with more abstract aspects like quality of decision-making바카라 웹사이트and바카라 웹사이트speed of adjudication.

***