RAJ KUMAR
Ranchi, Nov 26: Judicial officers were made aware of various issues and challenges associated with criminal laws during the third technical session of two- day Regional Conference on ‘Contemporary Judicial Developments and Strengthening Justice through Law and Technology’ organized by National Judicial Academy, India in collaboration with High Court of Jharkhand and Judicial Academy.
Justice Joymala Bagchi of Calcutta High Court discussed the matter included ‘Developing Contours of Bail Jurisprudence’, “Reverse Burden of Proof: Shifting of Onus and Statutory Requirements’, ‘PMLA: Powers of Detention of the Directorate of Enforcement, Constitutional and Statutory Protection as Well as Restrictive Bail conditions), Electronic Evidence and Global Legal perspective. Justice G.R.Swaminathan of Madras High Court was also present on the occasion.
Judicial Officers from the states of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Orissa and Bihar, members of registry, advocates besides law students of NSURL Ranchi, were present on the occasion.
Earlier in the inaugural session, Jharkhand High Court judge and Judge in-charge of Judicial Academy S. Chandrashekhar, delivering a welcoming address emphasized upon the role of Judges by saying that judges owe an undying allegiance to the rule of law.
Narrowly touching upon the different topics to be discussed in each session Justice Chandrashekhar cited Somerset v. Stewart wherein the idea of comity was introduced by Lord Manfield by saying that “Lordships nevertheless recognise that too rigid adherence to precedent may lead to injustice in a particular case and also unduly restrict the proper development of the law” he added.
Further Quoting Chief Justice of India, Justice Chandrashekhar said: “Technology Must Be Understood as The Facilitator of Change”.
He also cited Plato saying “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws”.
Retired Supreme Court Justice Indira Banerjee on the occasion highlighted the significance of the day saying ‘73 years ago, the Constitution was drafted and this day therefore is celebrated as Constitution Day and thus holding a conference on ‘judicial developments’ on such a day is indeed meaningful.’
She said: “All the judges across board and hierarchy perform the same function of dispensation of justice. Justice has not been defined anywhere. It has not been defined in the Constitution as well. But the principles enumerated in the preamble of the Constitution encapsulate the idea of justice.”
She said: “Judges have the duty to interpret the law and not enact law. They should interpret the law in such a manner that justice is served. By the process of interpretation, many changes have been brought to existing ideas.”
The retired Supreme Court judge Banerjee further said: “The Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati Case propounded the concept of basic structure which was further developed in the Minerva Mills and Waman Rao cases later on. The High Courts and Supreme Courts by way of interpretation have greatly expanded the scope of article 21 which now includes Right to environment, right to speedy trial, and many other rights.
She said: “Much is still to be done. Many directive principles are yet to be realised.” She quoted Justice Benjamin Franklin: “Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.”
She stressed upon the need of empathic judges: “Judges should be empathetic. They should render justice of quality and expeditiously. Justice should also be inexpensive. Modern technology like virtual hearings should be used to reduce the difficulty of lawyers.”
“Further, justice will only be served when the judicial interpretation is progressive in nature. It should not be regressive. In Shah Bano Case, muslim women’s right to divorce was rendered otiose, negatively impacting the Muslim women,” she said.
Later talking about freedom of speech and expressing retired Supreme Court judge Justice Banerjee said: “Media has a very pivotal role to perform in a democracy but the media should also be circumspect in their actions. They should not conduct media trials. Fair criticism of judgments is welcome but there should not be attempts to scandalize the courts and obstruct the cause of justice. The judiciary should also not be very sensitive and the power to condemn by way of contempt should be exercised sparingly.”
She also talked about the language of court and said: “Language of judgments should be simple so that even common man is able to understand the same. Judges should be politically correct in their judgments and avoid use of any language that suggests bias.”
