Ankur Lal Advocate

+9192160 17007

[email protected]

Facebook-f Twitter Instagram Linkedin

Legal Article

Lok Adalat: People’s Court

Leave a Comment / Leagl Article, Legal Article / By

Introduction Meaning: Lok Adalat translates to “People’s Court” and aligns with Gandhian principles. Historical Context: Recognized by the Supreme Court as an ancient adjudicatory system in India, still relevant today. Role in ADR: Part of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system, offering informal, cost-effective, and swift justice. History First Lok Adalat: Held in Gujarat in 1982 as a voluntary, conciliatory body without statutory authority. Statutory Status: Gained statutory backing under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 due to its increasing popularity. Organization Authorities Involved: State/District Legal Services Authority Supreme Court/High Court/Taluk Legal Services Committee Composition: Typically includes a judicial officer as chairman, a lawyer (advocate), and a social worker. Intervals and Areas: Organized at intervals and locations as deemed necessary by the authorities. National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) Constitution: Formed under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, effective from November 9, 1995. Purpose: Establishes a uniform network across the nation to provide free and competent legal services to weaker sections of society. Jurisdiction Scope: Pending court cases or matters within the jurisdiction of any court. Disputes referred by the court or upon application by parties involved. Types of Cases: Matrimonial/family disputes Compoundable criminal cases Land acquisition cases Labour disputes Workmen’s compensation cases Bank recovery cases Exclusions: Non-compoundable offences under any law. Powers Equivalence to Civil Court: Same powers as vested in a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure (1908). Can specify its own procedure for dispute resolution. Judicial Proceedings: Proceedings considered judicial under the Indian Penal Code (1860). Deemed a Civil Court under the Code of Criminal Procedure (1973). Award Finality: Lok Adalat awards are final, binding, and equivalent to a Civil Court decree. No appeals allowed against Lok Adalat awards. Benefits Cost-Effective: No court fee; refunded if already paid. Procedural Flexibility: No strict adherence to procedural laws, enabling speedy trials. Direct Interaction: Parties can interact directly with judges via counsel. Non-Appealable Awards: Ensures finality and prevents delays. Permanent Lok Adalats Establishment: Introduced through the Legal Services Authorities Act amendment in 2002. Function: Handles disputes related to public utility services (e.g., transport, postal services). Composition: Chairman (district judge/retired judge) Two other experienced persons in public utility services. Jurisdiction: Does not handle non-compoundable offences. Monetary jurisdiction up to Rs. 1 Crore. Procedure: Accepts applications before court proceedings. Aims for settlement formulation; if unsuccessful, decides on merits. Drawback: Failure to settle returns the case to the court, causing delays. Conclusion Lok Adalats provide an accessible, cost-effective, and speedy alternative to conventional courts, promoting amicable settlements. Their integration within the Indian legal system underscores the importance of traditional and community-based dispute resolution mechanisms in contemporary jurisprudence.    

Understanding the Uniform Civil Code: A Comprehensive Overview and Its Implications

Leave a Comment / Legal Article / By

Introduction- The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) represents a significant and ambitious reform in India’s legal landscape, proposing a single set of personal laws that would govern all citizens, irrespective of their religion. The concept aims to replace the diverse array of personal laws such as those concerning marriage, divorce, and inheritance specific to different religious communities with a standardized legal framework. This move is grounded in the principles of equality and secularism enshrined in the Indian Constitution. The UCC seeks to address disparities and ensure equal legal treatment for all, fostering national unity and coherence in a multicultural society. Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is defined in our Constitution under Article 44 of Directive Principles of State Policy. It states that it is the duty of the state to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India. In other words, we can say that it means one country one rule. Let us find out more about Uniform Civil Code, and its pros and cons. Purpose of Uniform Civil Code Romans have Jus Civile, a legal contemporary term that upholds all the rules and principles of law derived from the laws and customs of Rome. Uniform Civil Code is followed in countries like UK, France, US (California has a Family Code that applies to all citizens, regardless of their religion). Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Turkey, Indonesia, Egypt and Ireland. All these countries have one set of personal laws for all religions and there are no separate laws for any particular religion or community. In India, the Lex Loci Report of October 1840 emphasized the importance and necessity of uniformity in codification of Indian law, relating to crimes, evidences and contract but it recommended that personal laws of Hindus and Muslims should be kept outside such codification. Divide and Rule policy of the British Empire. Hindu’s-brahamanical customs accepted-fear of opposition from higher castes. Muslims-diverse local customs so a uniform Sharia law of 1937 enacted to govern all Muslims. However local customs were allowed to outweigh the written text of law. After independence Hindus have to follow the Hindu code bill 1956, in the form of four separate acts, the Hindu Marriage Act, Succession Act, Minority and Guardianship Act and Adoptions and Maintenance Act. Muslims and other religions were given the liberty to follow their own respective laws. For Muslims, the Shariat prevails and All India Muslim Personal Law Board keeps attempting to regulate their laws. Why Do We Need a UCC? A Uniform Civil Code is needed to ensure equality and justice by providing a single legal framework for all citizens, regardless of their religion. It aims to: Promote Equality: It ensures that all individuals are treated equally under the law, eliminating disparities based on religious or community-specific personal laws. Simplify the Legal System: By standardizing laws related to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption, it reduces legal complexity and confusion. Enhance National Integration: It fosters a sense of unity and national identity by aligning personal laws with the principles of the Constitution, which upholds secularism and equality. Overall, the UCC seeks to balance the diverse needs of India’s population while ensuring fair and consistent treatment for all citizens. Shah Bano Begum v. Mohammad Ahmed Khan (1985) The Shah Bano Begum v. Mohammad Ahmed Khan case (1985) is a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India concerning the Uniform Civil Code (UCC). Shah Bano, a Muslim woman, was divorced by her husband, Mohammad Ahmed Khan, and was not provided alimony. She sought maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which applies to all citizens regardless of religion. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Shah Bano, directing her ex-husband to provide her with maintenance under the provisions of Section 125. The court emphasized that personal laws should not contradict the principles of equality and justice guaranteed by the Constitution. This judgment was significant because it highlighted the need for a uniform approach to personal laws and sparked a national debate on the implementation of the UCC. The case underscored the challenge of reconciling personal laws with constitutional guarantees of equality and protection. Danial Latifi v. UOI (2001) The Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) case was a pivotal Supreme Court ruling in India concerning the application of Muslim personal law in the context of alimony and the broader issue of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC). In this case, Danial Latifi challenged the validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which was enacted after the Shah Bano case. Latifi argued that the Act did not provide sufficient protection for divorced Muslim women, as its limited maintenance to the period of iddah (waiting period) and did not ensure a fair and adequate maintenance beyond that period. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Act but interpreted it in a way that required the husband to provide maintenance beyond the iddah period if the wife was unable to support herself. The Court emphasized that Muslim personal law must comply with constitutional guarantees of equality and justice. This ruling reinforced the principle that personal laws must align with the Constitution’s guarantee of equality and fair treatment, contributing to the ongoing discourse on the need for a Uniform Civil Code in India. Ms Jorden Diengdeh v. S.S. Chopra (1985) The case Ms. Jorden Diengdeh v. S.S. Chopra (1985) is a notable Supreme Court decision in India concerning the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) and personal laws. In this case, Ms. Jorden Diengdeh, a Christian, sought to invoke the provisions of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, which governs Christian marriages and divorces. She contended that under this Act, she was entitled to relief in a divorce case. The respondent, S.S. Chopra, argued that the provisions were not applicable in the manner claimed by Ms. Diengdeh. The Supreme Court’s ruling addressed the issue of whether personal laws for different communities could be applied uniformly in a manner that aligns with the principles of equality and fairness under …

Understanding the Uniform Civil Code: A Comprehensive Overview and Its Implications Read More »

The Right to Information Act, 2005: Empowering Citizens and Enhancing Transparency in India

Leave a Comment / Legal Article / By

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, enacted in 2005, is a landmark legislation in India that has fundamentally transformed the landscape of governance and citizen engagement. Designed to promote transparency and accountability in public administration, the RTI Act empowers citizens to seek information from government institutions and hold them accountable for their actions. This article delves into the significance of the RTI Act, its impact on governance, and the challenges it faces.  Historical Context and Purpose Before the RTI Act, accessing information from government agencies was a cumbersome and often opaque process. Bureaucratic inertia and a lack of transparency were commonplace, making it difficult for citizens to engage meaningfully with their government. The RTI Act was introduced to address these issues by enshrining the right to information as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution, aligning with the principles of democracy and good governance.  Key Provisions of the RTI Act The RTI Act provides a comprehensive framework for the dissemination of information. Its key provisions include: Right to Information: Citizens have the right to request information from any public authority, which is defined broadly to include any organization or body owned or controlled by the government or substantially funded by it. Information Request Procedure: The Act mandates that requests for information should be responded to within 30 days. In cases where information concerns the life and liberty of an individual, the response time is reduced to 4 hours. Exemptions and Exceptions: While the Act promotes transparency, it also recognizes the need to protect certain categories of information. These include national security, privacy, and confidential commercial information. However, even these exemptions are subject to scrutiny to prevent misuse. Appeal Mechanism: The Act provides for an appellate process, including an internal review within the public authority and an external appeal to the Central or State Information Commission, ensuring that citizens have avenues to challenge unsatisfactory responses. Obligations of Public Authorities: Public authorities are required to proactively disclose certain categories of information, such as organizational structure, functions, and decision-making processes, thereby enhancing transparency.   Impact on Governance and Society The RTI Act has had a profound impact on Indian governance and society: Enhanced Transparency: The RTI Act has significantly increased the transparency of government operations. By facilitating access to information, it has empowered citizens to scrutinize the actions of public officials and demand accountability. Empowerment of Citizens: The Act has empowered individuals by providing them with the tools to seek information about government schemes, expenditures, and decision-making processes. This empowerment has led to greater civic engagement and activism. Reduction in Corruption: The RTI Act has played a crucial role in exposing corruption and malpractices. Numerous cases of financial irregularities and administrative lapses have come to light through RTI applications, leading to corrective actions and increased public accountability. Improvement in Service Delivery: Public authorities are now more conscious of their responsibilities due to the RTI Act. This awareness has led to improvements in service delivery and administrative efficiency as agencies strive to avoid negative scrutiny.  Challenges and Criticisms Despite its successes, the RTI Act faces several challenges and criticisms: Bureaucratic Resistance: Some public officials and institutions are resistant to the RTI Act, often delaying responses or providing incomplete information. This resistance undermines the Act’s effectiveness and hampers transparency. Underutilization and Lack of Awareness: In some areas, especially rural regions, there is limited awareness about the RTI Act and its provisions. This underutilization restricts the Act’s potential to effect change. Privacy Concerns: Balancing transparency with privacy concerns is a delicate task. There have been instances where the release of information has conflicted with individual privacy rights, raising questions about the boundaries of transparency. Resource Constraints: The Central and State Information Commissions, responsible for adjudicating appeals, often face resource constraints and a backlog of cases. This can lead to delays in the resolution of disputes.  The Path Forward To strengthen the RTI Act and address its challenges, several measures can be considered: Awareness Campaigns: Enhanced awareness campaigns and training programs can help citizens understand their rights under the RTI Act and encourage more widespread utilization. Capacity Building: Improving the capacity and efficiency of public authorities and information commissions can address bureaucratic resistance and expedite the processing of requests and appeals. Clear Guidelines on Privacy: Developing clear guidelines on the balance between transparency and privacy can help mitigate concerns and ensure that information disclosure does not infringe on individual rights. Monitoring and Evaluation: Regular monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the RTI Act can help identify areas for improvement and ensure that the Act continues to meet its objectives. Conclusion The Right to Information Act, 2005, stands as a testament to India’s commitment to democratic principles and good governance. By empowering citizens to access information and hold public authorities accountable, the RTI Act has made significant strides in enhancing transparency and reducing corruption. However, for the Act to realize its full potential, continued efforts to address its challenges and reinforce its provisions are essential. As India moves forward, the RTI Act will remain a cornerstone of democratic engagement and public accountability.

Patent Illegality as a Basis for Judicial Intervention in Arbitration

Leave a Comment / Leagl Article, Legal Article / By

Arbitration is a method where one or more arbitrators resolve disputes and issue legally binding decisions, offering a private alternative to lengthy and complex court procedures. Efforts have been made at both national and international levels to uphold arbitration’s independence by limiting judicial review of arbitral awards. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 was enacted to ensure minimal judicial interference and reinforce the binding nature of arbitration awards. Due to its efficiency and finality, arbitration is a valuable alternative in commercial disputes. In the case of I-Pay Clearing Services Pvt. Ltd. v. ICICI Bank Limited, the Supreme Court of India examined various sections of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. It concluded that section 34(4) of the Act, which uses the term “where it is appropriate,” allows the court discretion in deciding whether to refer a case back to arbitration. The Court clarified that “curable defects” could be corrected, but only if there is a substantive “finding” on the issue, not merely “reasoning.” Without concrete findings, reasoning alone cannot rectify an award, limiting the Court’s ability to act under Section 34(4) if the award appears patently illegal.   Historical Context Historically, judicial involvement in arbitral decisions has been significant. When India joined the New York Convention in 1960, the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act 1961 governed foreign arbitration, establishing that arbitral awards could be refused if contrary to public policy. The subjective nature of “public policy” led to increased judicial intervention, contrary to arbitration’s principles of efficiency and finality. To address these issues, UNCITRAL adopted a model law aimed at regulating international arbitration with a focus on party autonomy and minimal judicial interference. The model law, which influenced the 1996 Act, aimed to unify India’s arbitration laws with global standards, reduce court oversight, and facilitate the enforcement of awards. The Law Commission of India proposed including a provision to annul an award if it contained an evident error that raised a substantial legal question. This suggestion was incorporated into the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill 2003, which added patent illegality as a ground for challenging awards. This includes errors in law, breaches of constitutional or statutory provisions, or conflicts with common law.   Case Laws on Public Policy and Patent Illegality Public policy and patent illegality have been shaped by key Supreme Court rulings. In Renusagar Power Plant Ltd. v. General Electric Co. (1994), the Court defined public policy as a reason for rejecting an arbitral award, establishing three grounds: India’s fundamental policy, national interests, and morality. This expanded judicial involvement with arbitral awards. In Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd., the Court broadened the definition of “public policy,” incorporating the fundamental policy of India, which lacked an exhaustive definition and was subject to interpretation. This increased judicial intervention, sometimes leading to criticisms of judicial overreach. In Associate Builders v. DDA, the Court established a test for patent illegality, holding that an arbitral award could be set aside if it “shocks the conscience” of the court. The decision emphasized that an award must be based on the agreement’s terms and could be challenged if the arbitrator’s interpretation was irrational or unfair. In Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Company Limited v. National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), the Supreme Court ruled that patent illegality does not necessarily need to relate to public policy. The case of Patel Engineering Ltd. v. North Eastern Power Corporation Ltd. (2020) reaffirmed the standards for patent illegality set by Associate Builders, while distinguishing between non-compliance with contract terms and misinterpretation of contract terms.   Conclusion While the principle of finality in arbitral awards is crucial, the concept of patent illegality remains relevant to address potential errors and uphold the rule of law. It serves to protect public interest, ensure fairness and justice, maintain contractual integrity, and deter arbitral misconduct. However, it is important to avoid exploiting this principle to preserve the separation of powers and the efficiency goals of arbitration. In I-Pay Clearing Services, the Court appropriately emphasized the need for substantial findings over mere reasoning, indicating that an award without necessary findings is a serious error that cannot be enforced. However, arbitration tribunals can correct such defects in their awards.

Overview of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985

Leave a Comment / Legal Article / By

The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 represents a landmark in India’s legal framework to combat drug abuse and trafficking. This legislation consolidated existing drug laws into a single comprehensive Act, balancing the need to address drug abuse while allowing for legitimate medical and scientific use of controlled substances.   Origins and Purpose Passed by the Indian Parliament in 1985, the Act was designed to strengthen the country’s response to drug-related issues and to align with international anti-drug treaties. It revised earlier laws, imposing stricter controls and harsher penalties to tackle drug trafficking and misuse. The Act established key regulatory bodies like the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) and the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Consultative Committee to oversee and enforce drug policies. The Act aims to meet international drug control obligations and adhere to constitutional requirements to limit harmful intoxicants. It addresses a wide range of substances, including opium, morphine, heroin, cannabis, cocaine, and amphetamines, seeking to prevent both abuse and illicit trafficking.   Key Definitions and Terminology Understanding the Act requires familiarity with its key terms: – Narcotic Drugs: Substances with the potential for abuse or addiction, such as opium, morphine, and heroin. – Psychotropic Substances: Materials affecting mental processes, including LSD, MDMA, and methamphetamine. – Addict: A person dependent on narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. – Offender: A person violating the Act’s provisions, including illegal activities related to controlled substances. – Controlled Substances: Drugs regulated by the Central Government due to their abuse potential. – Essential Narcotic Drugs: Substances like codeine and morphine permitted for medical use. – Illicit Traffic: Unauthorized activities involving narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, such as smuggling.   Enforcement and Implementation The enforcement of the Narcotics Act involves various authorities:   – Central Government: Appoints the Narcotics Commissioner and other officers to manage drug policy and enforcement. – State Governments: Appoint officers to regulate and oversee drug-related activities within their jurisdictions, coordinating with the central authorities. – Additional Authorities: The Central Government can establish further bodies to support the implementation of the Act. Effective enforcement requires cooperation between central and state agencies and international partners to address the complex nature of drug trafficking.   Prohibitions and Regulations The Act enforces strict regulations on activities related to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances: – Prohibitions: Includes cultivation, production, manufacture, possession, sale, and transport, except for regulated medical and scientific purposes. – Permitted Activities: Regulated by the Central Government for medical treatment, research, and industrial purposes, such as the controlled cultivation of cannabis. – Additional Prohibitions: Includes allowing premises for illegal activities, financing or abetting such activities, and harboring individuals involved in them.   Penalties and Punishments Violations of the Act are met with severe penalties: – Imprisonment: Ranges from 6 months to 20 years, depending on the offence. Repeat offenders may face up to 30 years in prison. – Fines: Can range from Rs 20,000 for possession to Rs 2 lakh for commercial trafficking. The Act also permits asset seizure related to drug offences. – Treatment: Convicts may be required to undergo de-addiction treatment at government facilities, aimed at rehabilitation and reducing recidivism.   Powers of Search, Seizure, and Arrest The Act grants significant powers to law enforcement: – Search: Authorized officers can search premises and vehicles suspected of housing illicit drugs at any time. – Seizure: Includes confiscating drugs, manufacturing equipment, and related materials. Seized items must be reported to the magistrate and secured by law enforcement. – Arrest: Officers can arrest suspects without a warrant and must inform them of the grounds for their arrest, presenting them before a magistrate within 24 hours.   Treatment, Rehabilitation, and Awareness The Act emphasizes treatment and rehabilitation: – Rehabilitation Centers: Established to provide medical and psychological support to addicts. – Immunity from Prosecution: Addicts seeking treatment at recognized centers can avoid legal consequences. – Awareness Campaigns: Conducted by both government and non-governmental organizations to educate the public and reduce drug abuse. Coordination with International Bodies India collaborates with international organizations to enhance drug control: – Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961: Limits drug use to medical and scientific purposes, guiding national and international cooperation. – Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971: Controls psychotropic substances similarly. – United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC): Supports India with legal assistance, data collection, and infrastructure improvements to curb drug trafficking.   Impact and Evolution The Narcotics Act has significantly influenced drug policy in India: – Establishment of NCB: Oversees drug law enforcement, tracking trends and coordinating with state and international agencies. – Amendments: The Act has been revised to address evolving drug threats, including expanding definitions of illicit trafficking and setting up special courts. – Criticism and Challenges: Some argue that strict penalties lead to prison overcrowding and disproportionately affect minor offenders.   Conclusion The Narcotics Act of 1985 marked a decisive step in India’s fight against drug abuse and trafficking. Despite ongoing debates about its impact and effectiveness, the Act has played a crucial role in shaping the country’s approach to drug control. By combining stringent regulation with efforts in treatment and international cooperation, the Act aims to mitigate the harm caused by narcotics and safeguard public health.

Constitutionality Of The Electoral Bonds

Leave a Comment / Legal Article / By

The Electoral Bond Scheme of 2018, was introduced by the Ministry of Finance on January 02, 2018, provided for donations to political parties through issuance of electoral bonds using machinery of the State Bank of India (“SBI”). An electoral bond is like a promissory note. It is a bearer instrument payable to the bearer on demand. Unlike a promissory note, which contains the details of the payer and payee, an electoral bond has no information on the parties in the transaction at all, providing complete anonymity and confidentiality to the parties. It has inserted a striking feature that it would not carry the name or any other information of the donor, thereby making the donation anonymous. It could be encashed by an eligible political party through a bank account with an authorised bank. SBI had been authorised to issue and encash bonds under the Electoral Bond Scheme and there was no limit to the number of bonds that a person or company could purchase. However, the constitutionality of the said scheme was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court at multiple instances but it was finally put on record before the 5 Judge constitutional bench comprising of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra in the case of Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors. challenging the amendments in the Finance Act, 2017, which opened the path for the Electoral Bond Scheme, on the grounds that the anonymity associated with the issuance of electoral bonds weakens the transparency in political funding and invades upon the voter’s right to information. However, a political party eligible to run campaigns must register under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, to receive electoral bonds. It will have a life of only 15 days, during which it can be used to make donations to political parties. The two crucial questions before the hon’ble constitutional bench was; a) whether the non- disclosure of information on voluntary contributions to political parties under the Electoral Bond Scheme and the amendments to Section 29C of the Representation of People Act, Section 182(3) of the Companies Act and Section 13A (b) of the Income Tax Act were violative of the Right to Information of citizens under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India; and b) whether unlimited corporate funding to political parties, as envisaged by the amendment to Section 182 (1) of the Companies Act infringes the principle of free and fair elections and violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The constitution bench unanimously held that the said scheme is unconstitutional and violative of the citizens right to information under article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The Bench noted that despite constitutional measures, there is great political inequality in India. This inequality is driven by money. As a result, people with deep pockets influenced political decisions. “Economic inequality”, the Chief Justice of India wrote, “leads to differing levels of political engagement because of the deep association between money and politics.” It gives large donors a “seat at the table” and allows them to influence policy. The voter, therefore, must have access to information to assess whether “a correlation between policy making and financial contributions exists”. The Bench relied on the proportionality test laid down in Modern Dental College & Research Centre v State of Madhya Pradesh (2016). In that case, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Court had held that a measure restricting a fundamental right must have a “legitimate goal”, it must be a “suitable means” of reaching that goal, it must create the least amount of restriction as possible, and must be balanced and not have “a disproportionate impact” on the right holder. The Scheme was proposed as a tool to curb black money. The Court held that “the purpose of curbing black money is not traceable to any of the grounds in Article 19(2),” which lists reasonable restrictions to Article 19. Even if it were to accept that curbing black money was a legitimate goal, the Court said, the Scheme would have to pass the second test of being a “suitable means” to achieve that goal. The Scheme would pass the test even if it was “one of the many methods” to achieve the goal or “only partially gives effect to the purpose.” Applying the “double proportionality standards”, the court said that the clause was unconstitutional as it did not balance the conflicting right to information of voters with contributors’ right to privacy regarding their political affiliations. The Ld. Chief Justice of India further held that the “unlimited contribution by companies to political parties is antithetical to free and fair elections because it allows certain persons/companies to wield their clout and resources to influence policy making.” Giving companies this “unrestrained influence” violates the value of “one person, one vote”. The Supreme Court ordered banks to forthwith stop issuing Electoral Bonds and that the State Bank of India (SBI) shall furnish the details of Electoral Bonds encashed by the political parties. The court said that SBI should submit the details to the Election Commission of India and ECI shall publish these details on the website. Hence, the scheme of 2018 allowing anonymous electoral bonds were held unconstitutional, by the Hon’ble High Court and The CJI while reading out his judgement said that the Supreme Court holds that anonymous electoral bonds are violative of Right to Information and Article 19(1)(a) and issuance of fresh bond was prohibited. The Supreme Court said that information about corporate contributors through Electoral Bonds must be disclosed as the donations by companies are purely for quid pro quo purposes. The court held that amendments in the Companies Act permitting unlimited political contributions by companies is arbitrary and unconstitutional. The Supreme Court said infringement of the Right to Information is not justified for the purpose of curbing black money.

Indian Constitution and Fair Trial

Leave a Comment / Legal Article / By

Fundamental Rights and Fair Trial As Indian citizens, we are all guaranteed fundamental rights that must be upheld. Even the accused are entitled to basic rights under Article 21 of the Constitution until and unless barred by the law, which the Supreme Court affirmed in the Rarriram vs. State of Madhya Pradesh case, emphasizing that “a fair trial is the heart of criminal jurisprudence.” The right to a fair trial is intrinsic to human rights. Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution ensures every accused has the right to legal representation, which requires them to be informed of the charges against them. Similarly, Section 211 of the CrPC mandates that the accused be aware of the grounds for arrest and specific accusations.   Key Elements of a Fair Trial A fair trial ensures the accused has a reasonable opportunity to present their case without bias, including impartial judgment and adequate representation. The principle of a fair trial encompasses both the rights of the accused and the victim. Factors contributing to a fair trial in India include the adversarial system inherited from the British, which presumes innocence until proven guilty and places the burden of proof on the prosecution.   Presumption of Innocence The presumption of innocence is a cornerstone of justice, derived from the Latin maxim “incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat,” meaning that the burden of proof lies with the complainant, not the accused. This principle prevents wrongful convictions, as affirmed in State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Naresh and Chandrappa vs. State of Karnataka. Everyone is entitled to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Independence and Impartiality of the Judge The Indian judiciary operates independently, with session court judges not appointed by the government to avoid political influence. Judges must remain impartial, free from biases or personal interests, as mandated by Section 479 of the CrPC, which prohibits judges with a stake in the case from presiding over it.   Right to a Speedy Trial Trials must be conducted promptly, allowing reasonable time for both parties to present their case. Delays undermine justice, as highlighted in Husainara Khatoon vs. State of Bihar, where under-trial prisoners faced incarceration longer than the maximum sentence for their alleged crimes. Section 309(1) of the CrPC supports this by mandating expeditious hearings, though care must be taken to avoid wrongful verdicts due to rushed proceedings.   Knowledge of the Accusation The accused must be fully informed of the grounds for their arrest. Section 50 of the CrPC requires that arresting officers provide this information, and Section 211 mandates that the accused be made aware of the charges in detail to mount an adequate defense.   Presence of the Accused The accused has the right to be present during trial proceedings and evidence collection, as per Section 273 of the CrPC. Section 317 allows a magistrate to excuse the accused from attendance if it serves justice. Evidence must be communicated clearly in a language the accused understands, as required by Section 279 of the CrPC, ensuring the accused can effectively participate in their defense.   Judiciary and Principles of Natural Justice Principles of natural justice, such as “Nemo Judex in Causa Sua” (no one should judge their own case) and “Audi Alteram Partem” (the other party must be heard), are foundational to fair trials. Though not codified, these principles underpin legal practices and ensure unbiased and thorough hearings. They are reflected in various legal provisions, and judges must uphold these principles to maintain justice.   Media Trial and Judiciary Media influence can skew public perception and pressure the judiciary. Media often presents one-sided narratives, which can undermine the impartiality of judicial proceedings, as seen in cases like M.P. Lohia vs. State of West Bengal and Saibal Kumar vs. BK. Sen. The Supreme Court has condemned media practices that interfere with justice, and it’s essential that media focus on objective reporting rather than commentary to avoid prejudicing court outcomes.   Procedural Safeguards for the Accused The CrPC mandates that police inform the arrested individual of the reasons for their arrest under Section 50. Section 57 and Article 22(2) require that the accused be presented before a magistrate within 24 hours. Legal aid is a fundamental right under Article 21 and Article 39A, and cases like Suk Das vs. Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh affirm this. Additionally, Section 327 of the CrPC ensures open court proceedings, with exceptions for sensitive cases.   Conclusion This article outlines the essential components of a fair trial, emphasizing adherence to constitutional and procedural guidelines. Violations of these standards undermine justice, and establishing oversight bodies to monitor trial processes could help address discrepancies. It is crucial for judges to remain unbiased and for the public to understand the negative impact of media trials. Ensuring fair trials involves balancing speed with thoroughness and addressing any procedural failures to uphold justice for all parties involved.