International Journal of Law

International Journal of Law

ISSN: 2455-2194; Impact Factor: RJIF 5.12
Received: 15-02-2019; Accepted: 17-03-2019
www.lawjournals.org
Volume 5; Issue 3; May 2019; Page No. 115-120

Constitutional Prespective of speedy Justice in India

Manpreet Kaur
Student, Department – LLM, University Chandigarh, University Mohali, Punjab, India

Abstract
When any person’s rights are violated, he mostly pronounce one sentence, “I will see you in the Court”. It shows individuals
faith toward judicial system. But the problem of delay in the disposal of cases pending in trial Court is currently one of the
major problems of judicial administration, although it has been with us since a long time. Reportedly, in some states, a few
under-trials spent more time in jails than the maximum term of imprisonment provided for the offence'. This kind of disturbing
situation has not gone unnoticed. The mass media and superior judiciary have come out with critical observation in respect of
those cases which came to light. here the provisions regarding speedy justice are discussed that are mentioned under the Indian
Constitution.

Keywords: provisions, constitution, superior, mentioned

Introduction denied or restrained to any citizen. By reason of economic

Justice is the backb0ne and object of any civilized society or other disabilities it may be social, political etc. further
and nation. The detection for justice has been an ideal in equal opportunity must be afforded for access to justice. as
which mankind has been hopeful for generations down the Its not enough that the law treats all persons equally,
line. Justice is a constitutional mandate for running a legal irrespective of the prevalent inequalities but the law must
as well as social institutions. In Indian Constitution, in its function or can be prevailed in such a way that all the
Preamble; defined and declared the common goal for its people have access to justice in spite of economic
citizens as, “to secure to all the citizens of India, Justice- disparities. The expression “Access to justice" concentrated
social, economic and political.” Article 14 guarantees on the following two basic reasons of the legal system:
equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws 1. The system must provide access to all the people
to all the citizens of the country. Article 39A of the presented before it.
Constitution mandates the State to secure that the operation 2. It should lead to results which are fast, fair and
of the legal system promotes and spread justice on the basis economically viable and free from ambiguity [4].
of equal opportunity and make sure that the same is not
denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other The Constitution of India reflects the reconnoiter and
inabilities. All persons have equal rights, but the problem is aspiration of the mankind for justice. The justice delivery
that, courts, but the judicial procedure is very complex, system is under an obligation to deliver prompt and
costly and sluggish, putting the poor persons at a squad. It is inexpensive justice to its Consumers, or the persons
one of prior duty of a welfare state to provide judicial and presented before it. The manner compromising on the
non-judicial dispute-resolution mechanisms, so that all quality of justice or the elements of fairness, equality and
citizens have equal access for resolution of their legal impartially is prescribed under the various provisions. As it
disputes and enforcement of their fundamental and legal can be understand that the Quality of justice suffers not only
rights under the constitution [1]. when an innocent person is punished or a guilty person is
The preamble which speaks of justice, article 38, directs the exonerated but when there is enormous delay in deciding
state to promote a just social order and Part 3 which cases. The parties suffer. It is a rightly said that "Justice
guarantees a humanist egalite, not as a petrified or pedantic delayed is Justice Denied". Speedy trial is a right of the
formula of legal pundits but as a project for abolition of accused that flows from Article 21 of the Constitution as
inequalities and promotion of equalization through the law, held by the Supreme Court in so many cases. It is clear that
constitute the spiritual essence of the constitution [2]. the Constitution of India does not contain any express
provision regarding the right to speedy justice. But the same
Right to speedy justice is expressed under Article 21 of the Constitution. A
The Indian Constitution enjoins the state to secure social, procedure prescribed by law for depriving a person of his
economic and political justice, making the constitutional fundamental rights unless it ensures a speedy trial for
mandate for speedy justice inescapable through article 14. It determination of guilt of the accused and delivered the
guarantees equality before the law without any justice. No procedure which does not ensure a reasonable
discrimination on mentions grounds and the equal protection quick and fair trial be regarded as 'reasonable, fair and just'
of the laws. Article 39A of the Constitution make it and will be in contravention of Article 21 of the
compulsory to the State to secure the operation of the legal Constitution. Speedy trial and speedy justice are co- linked
system in such a way so that it promotes justice on a basis of with each other and are the fundamental rights of the person.
equal opportunity and to make it clear that the same is not A denial from speedy justice is directly denial of justice [5].

115
International Journal of Law

A Famous Jurist late Nani A. Palkhivala has observed that: property, without due process of law". Protection under
"If I were asked to mention the greatest draw back of the article 21 is delivered to all persons whether citizens or
administration of justice in India today, I would say that it is foreigners or free or arrested or detained equally, but under
delay. There are inordinate delays in the disposal of cases. the due process of law. Supreme Court by the process of
We, as a nation, have some fine qualities, but a sense of the interpretation gave lay down the widest scope of Article 21
value of time is not one of them. Perhaps there are for protection of life and liberty of all individuals free as
historical reasons for our relaxed attitude to time. Ancient well as arrested and detained [9].
India had evolved the concepts of eternity and infinity. So
what do thirty years, wasted in litigation, matter against the Interpretation of procedure established by law
backdrop of eternity? Further, we believe in reincarnation, The standard that Article 21 bestow as a protection for
what does it matter if you waste this life? You will have personal liberty is the procedure established by law [10].
many more lives in which to make good". He said there is Nature and extent 0f the protection of personal liberty in
not any country in the world where litigation takes enough Article 21 depends upon the meaning and scope of the
time period as in India. our cases stretch over a length of standard of procedure established by law, which in turn
time, which makes aeon intelligible. The law may or may would ultimately depend on the interpretation of the
not a burden but in India it is certainly, a snail and our cases expression with the help of judicial process.
proceed at a pace, which would be regarded as unduly slow The proper explanation regarding this expression "procedure
in a community of snails. At last he said, Justice has to be established by law" was made by the Supreme Court in
blind but I failed to examine reason why it should also be Gopalan's [11] Case. In this case the petitioner challenged the
lame, here it just hobbles along, barely able to walk [6]. validity of the Preventive Detention Act under which he was
For the fault of some peoples, the bright glorious name of detained on the ground of interalia that the Act passed by
the judiciary cannot be permitted to be made ugly and un- Parliament did not conform to the standard of 'procedure
trustable. It is the policy framed and purpose observed established by law' as laid down in Article 21 and so it
behind of law, to have speedy justice for which efforts are violate the constitutional protection that is provided under
mandatory to be made to come to the expectation of the this Article. on the other hand it was contended by the
society of ensuring speedy, untainted and unpolluted justice Attorney General that the words this expression means,
[7]
. simply any procedure established or prescribed by a State
made law, on the other hand it was argued by the petitioner
Article 21 of the Constitution that the expression "procedure established by law" should
Article 21 of the Constitution deals with the fundamental be interpreted in a wider sense as meaning what was
rights, to personal liberty. These fundamental rights are understood in American constitutional law as "procedural
those rights that can not be violate by any authority. due process" [12].
Concept of speedy justice under Indian constitution
indirectly concern with the right to life or personal liberty Chief Justice Kania observed
that mentioned in art 21. Moreover the need for ‘Speedy "No defferent aid is compulsory to interpret the words of
Justice’ is also reflected by the demand of an individual Article 21, according to my opinion, are not unclear. When
with respect to his Right to Life and his Right to Dignity. we read it im simple words, and without thinking of other
The Concept 0f Right to Speedy Justice is deep rooted and Constitutions, the expression must mean procedure
grounded in one of the fundamental institution of humanity prescribed by the law of the State. If the Indian Constitution
as called it “Personal Liberty”. Personal Liberty is one of wanted to intercede to every person the protection given by
the most esteemed goal of every civilized society. Because the due process clause of the American Constitution there
liberty is one of the greatest patrimony of a man, so that we was nothing to prevent the Assembly from adopting the
can say without liberty life is lifeless and worthless to live. phrase or if they wanted to limit the same to procedure only,
To renounce from liberty is to renounce being a human to to adopt this expression with only single the word
surrender right of humanity, that is why liberty is called the 'procedure' prefixed to 'law'. However, the suitable question
core of a civilized society. Because the first and the is what is the right given under Article21? The only right is
foremost right, any living being is the right to life. All other that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal
rights are almost depend on this right because without life liberty except according to procedure established by law.
there can be no other right. our Constitution framers have one may like that right to cover a larger area, but to give
distinguishably placed personal liberty with right to life such a right is not the perquisite of the Court, it is the
under this article. Freedoms have been delivered in Article prerogative of the C0nstitution [13].
19. The exclusive distinction between Articles 19 and 2o is
that Article 19 provides exhaustive list of 6 freedoms, while Speedy trial as a constitutional right
Article 21 does not show any thing regarding concerned Speedy justice demands speedy and reasonably prompt trial
matter. But leaves to widest interpretation as well as in every case. Indian Judicial hatchet dug up deep into the
possible to this small Article than any other Articles of the philosophy of fundamental Rights of our Constitution and
whole Constitution [8]. right to speedy trial, inherent in the broad girth and contents
The Article prohibits impairment of life or personal liberty of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This found
except under certain circumstances according to procedure approved by the Supreme Court in the landmark cases of
established by law. It corresponds to the Fifth and M.H. Hoskot V. State of Maharashtra [14] and Hussainara
Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the Khatoon V. State of Bihar [15] in which the Supreme Court
relevant portions of which read: Nor be deprived of life, observed that, "speedy trial, and by speedy trial means,
liberty or property without due process of law and "Nor reasonably expeditious trial who is an essential part of
shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or fundamental right to life and liberty as asserted in Article 21

116
International Journal of Law

of the Indian Constitution. In other leading cases of Investigation

A.R.Antulay V. R.S.Nayak [16] and Sheela Barse V. Union The system adopted by police for investigating into the case
of lndia [17], The Suprem Court observed that, Right to has now become obsolete. As earlier due to old techniques
speedy trial is inherent in Article 21 of the Constitution and of investigation the police was not able to collect evidences
due to the violation of this right the consequences be that the effectively and quickly resulting into delayed investigation
prosecution itself liable to be sweep away on the ground that and ultimate result was delayed disposal of the case. At
it is a breach of a fundamental right. The Significance of present due to technological development, criminals
speedy justice is not only emphasized in Municipal law or committing a crime in a very planned manner by using
state laws but also in International Covenants. The haziness scientifically developed measures. Such type of criminal
of the Constitutional standards, to achieve speedy justice, activity may be checked and guilty person can be identified
the legislatures in recent years has shown deep interest. The if investigating agencies are well trained in doing scientific
best known for all and most comprehensive which includes investigation [22].
so many other parts, such effort is the Speedy trial Act of
1974 (Amended in 1979). The Federal Speedy Trial Act of Effect of omission, irregularities and illegalities in
1974 is a best example of effective legislation to fast investigation
criminal trials. The right to speedy trial is not expressly Their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed that a defect
asserted as one of the fundamental rights in the Constitution or illegality in investigation however serious has no direct
of India. It inter alia declares that concerning all criminal bearing effect on the competence or the procedure relating
matters the prosecution enjoy the right to speedy trial. For to cognizance or trial. If cognizance is in fact taken, on a
the first time, the Supreme Court of India in the Hussainara police report debauch by the breach of a mandatory
Khatoon case [18] declared that the right to speedy trial was provisions relating to investigation. So There can be no
implicit in the broad sweep and content of Article 21. The doubt due to the result of the trial which follows it cannot be
right to speedy trial was a fair and reasonable procedure that set aside unless the illegality in the investigation can be
is guaranteed by Article 21. It could not be arbitrary, shown to have brought about a discomfiture of justice [23].
national or oppressive. The core of speedy trial was
considered as a protection against immure. Delay in execution of sentence
Right to speedy trial is the extract of justice as justice In 1975, the appellant was sentenced to death and was
delayed is justice denied. Speedy trial is not mentioned as a charged of committing wicked and diabolic murders and
particular Fundamental Right in the Constitution, even in since then he was in solitary confinement. Before conviction
criminal procedure code, it does not specifically guaranteed, he had been a 'prisoner under remand’ for 2 years. The
nor there is any specific provision which prescribing the Supreme Court held that 2 years delay in execution of the
maximum period for which a magistrate can keep an under sentence after the pronouncement of judgment of the trial
trial in jail without holding trial. The right to speedy trial court will entitle the condemned prisoner to ask for
has said to have its roots at the foundation of criminal commutation of his sentence of death to imprisonment for
proceedings, and the US Supreme Court has traced its roots life. It is observed: ―
back to the 12th century [19]. Sentence of death is one thing, sentence of death followed
by lengthy imprisonment prior to execution is another. A
Stages covered by right to speedy trial period distress and suffering from pain is an inevitable
Fair, just and reasonable procedure implicit in Article 21 of consequence of sentence of death, but a respite of it beyond
the Constitution creates a right of the accused to be the time necessary for appeal and consideration of retrieve is
tried speedily. Right to speedy trial is the right of the not” [24].
accused. The fact that a speedy trial is also in public interest
or by its serves the social interest also, does not make it any- Appeal
the-less right of the accused. Right to speedy trial flowing The Supreme Court standing at the apex and the High
from Article 21 encompasses all the stages, namely the Courts below it. It is the supreme interpreter of the
stage of investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision and constitution and the guardian of the peoples fundamental
retrial [2o]. rights. It is the ultimate court of appeal in all civil and
This is how the courts shall understand this right and have criminal matters and the final interpreter of the law of the
gone to the extent of disaffirming the prosecution after such land. Due to filing number of appeals the strength of cases
inordinate delay in concluding the trial of an accused pending cases increase and courts covered with lots of
keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. burden. Art-32 of the constitution provides a extensive
Keeping a person in suspended animation for 8 years or original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court in regard to
more without any case at all cannot according to the spirit of enforcement of fundamental right. Under the concept of
the procedure established by law. It is correct that although speedy justice the that is provided under ast 21 as the
minimum sentence to be imposed upon convicted person is fundamental right, the appeal is filed to the Supreme court
prescribed by the statute yet keeping in view the provisions in case of violation of its provisions.
of Art. 21 of the Constitution of India and the interpretation The appellate jurisdiction of the supreme court can be
there of qua the right of an accused to a speedy trial, judicial entreat by a certificate granted by the High court concerned
benevolence can play a important role and a convicted under article 132(1), 133(1) or 134 of the constitution in
person can be compensated for the mental anguish. Which respect of any judgment, decree, or final order of a High
he undergoes on account of protracted trial due to the fault court in both civil and criminal cases involving substantial
of the prosecution by this Court in the exercise of its extra- question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
ordinary jurisdiction [21]. The supreme court has also a wide appellate jurisdiction

117
International Journal of Law

regarding all courts and tribunals in India in as much as it they may go."
may, in its direction grant special leave to appeal under In another case of CItajoo Rant V. Radhey Shayam [27]
Article-136 of the constitution from any judgment, decree, “delay in trial was one of the factors on the basis of which
determination, sentence or order in any cause of matter the Supreme Court dropped the further proceedings.”
passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kapil Deo Shukla [28] “though
India [25]. the court found the acquittal of the accused unsustainable, it
refused to order a remand or direct a trial after a lapse of
Judicial pronouncements on speedy trial in india twenty years.”
Every individual wants freedom. Without freedom no
individual can spend his life as a free citizen of a country. The Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of
Freedom and liberties are only for the living or surviving India
[28]
purpose. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees , Has held that art. 21 of the Constitution of India confers
right to life and personal liberty to every person. A person a fundamental right on every individual not to be deprived
can be deprived of his life and personal liberty if two of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure
conditions are observed with it. First is, there must be Law prescribed under law and such procedure as required under
and second, there must be a procedure prescribed by that Article 21 has to be fair, just and reasonable and not
law, that the procedure is just, fair and reasonable. The arbitrary. The court has further said that, "If a person is
creativity of the Indian judicial system has been emerged deprived of his Liberty under a procedure such deprivation
when the Art. 21 is interpreted. Article 21 stands out as the would be violative of his fundamental right under Article 21
beacon light for all freedom lovers promising the progress and he would be entitled to enforce such fundamental right
of more rights when necessary and ensuring a minimum and secure his release. The apex Court has observed that in
degree of fairness in all legal system. The activist approach the broad sweep and content of art. 21 right to speedy trial is
of the Supreme Court through liberal interpretations have implicit.
given new magnitude to the right to life and personal liberty. In Charles Sobharaj v. Suptd, Central Jail, Tihar [29] Justice
In case of infraction, now the Court does not remain silent Krishna Iyer observed that, “Whenever Fundamental rights
looker but provides remedial relief by way of compensation. are neglected or Legislative protection ignored, towards any
The Indian judiciary plays a significant role in protecting the prisoner's impairment, then concern court's writ will run.
rights of the people and it has tried to give some rights like The parrot cry of discipline will not deter security, will not
right to speedy trial, right to fair trial. A constitutional status scare discretion, and will not deter the judicial process.”
by including all these rights within the purview of Article 21 The apex Court in Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary,
of our Constitution. The judiciary in India has played a State of Bihar [3o] case observed that it is a land mark in the
dapper role in the regime of justice by providing fair and development of speedy trial jurisprudence. In this case, a
just trial to all its citizens. There are relation of writ of Habeas Corpus was filed on behalf of men and
pronouncement of the Supreme Court and High Courts women languishing in jail of the State of Bihar awaiting
judgments on the subject of trial where in the Courts have trial. Some of them had been in jail for a period much
questioned the delays and discharged the accused. The most beyond what they would have spent had maximum sentence
apparent malady which has infested the judicial concern is been imposed on them for the offence of which they were
the pointing process and inordinate delay that takes place in accused. alarmed by the shocking revelations made in the
the disposal of cases. The collection of accumulated Writ petition and concerned about the refusal of the basic
workload of different Courts present a startle scenario. As a human rights to those victims of callousness of the legal and
matter of fact, the whole system is crumbling down under judicial system, the Supreme Court went on to give a new
the weight of pending cases that is increasing every day. directions to the Constitutional Jurisprudence. During
Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer and Justice P.N. Bhagwati were prevailing with all, the Court heavily relied on its decision
aware of all these distemper. However, judicial delays in in an earlier case in which the Court gave a very progressive
India effect whole body and system. No person can even interpretation to Article 21 of the Constitution.
hope to get justice in a fairly reasonable manner. are also delayed longer. This is effect the legal position in
Proceedings in Criminal cases go on for years, also strong manner. In State of West Bengal v. Anwar all Sarkar
sometime cross decades. Civil cases ar to persons or to cases [31]
, “A Bench of 7 judges of the Supreme Court held
which are to be subjected to the special procedure that,'Ihe necessity of a speedy trial is too vague and
prescribed by the Act." uncertain to form the basis of valid and reasonable
In Machander V. State of Hyderabad [26] case The Supreme distribution. It is too improper as there can hardly be any
Court refused to take the case back to the trial court for definite objective test to sort it. It have no classification
fresh trial because of delay of 5 years between the regarding at all in the real sense of the term.
commission and the final Judgment of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has observed: "We are not able to keep Consequences of infringment of right to speedy trial
persons on trial for their live and under uncertain suspense In criminal law during proceedings, some delays are
because trial judges omit to do their duty. We have to show considered systematic delays, which are neither within the
a effective balance between conflicting rights and duties. control of prosecutor nor accused. These are following:
While it is mandatory on us to see, the guilty person do not a. Delay wholly due to pile of the court calendar, non-
escape, it is more necessary to see the accused person of availability of Judges, or other circumstances out of the
crimes are not indefinitely suffered. While every reasonable control of the prosecutor.
expansion must be given to those concerned with the b. Delay caused by the accused himself not even seeking
detection of crime and assigned with administration of adjournments but also by legal devices, which the
justice, but limits must be placed on the lengths to which prosecutor has to counter.

118
International Journal of Law

c. Delay caused by orders, whether induced by accused or Act, 1872 and substantive law, The Indian Penal Code,
not, of the court, necessitating appeals or revisions or 186o, by enacting a new major act called The Information
other concerned actions or proceedings. Technology Act, 2000
d. Delay caused by legitimate actions of the prosecutor
like getting a key witness who is out of the way or Conclusion
otherwise avoids process or appearance or tracing a key Moreover, we cannot give effect to ‘demand rule’ as justice
document or securing evidence from foreign [32]. can not denied or suspended on the grounds that the litigants
did not ask for speedy trials. So, the court has to apply
It is observed that If the accused is not brought to trial under various balance tests and find out that whether the right has
the specified period the case,is dismissed. American been violated or not. It is not possible to fix a period of trial
jurisdiction quit different however, on whether dismissal on because it will bound and restrict the judiciary and there will
these grounds constitutes a bar to subsequent prosecution be a burden of swift disposal of cases which may contort the
for the same offence [33]. 1o states provide that the cases quality of justice. The right to a speedy trial has been
were dismissed if the time limits are exceeded. Due to this it known, on occasion, to work to the harm of the defend as
is resulted that: when sufficient time is not allowed for preparation of an
a. A guilty person (defendant) going free because of an adequate defense and the higher courts have found it
administrative problem. necessary to keep a close his eyes regarding concerned
b. It can also allow the prosecutor to latency deliberately matter. There are some other options for settlement of
because there is too little evidence for conviction. disputes like, mediation, conciliation or settlement through
c. Blame the judge and judicial administration when the Lok Adalat which helps in disposing off the cases fast [37].
case is dismissed.
d. Faith on the judiciary also effected, sometime people References
started to take law in their own hands. 1. Justice S.B. Sinha, “Judicial Reform in Justice Delivery
System” (2004) 4 SCC 35
The Speedy trial always considered a reasonable, fair and 2. V.R. Krishna Iyer, Law Versus Justice,56(Deep& Deep
just but a delayed trial may not always be an unfair trial. Publications, New Delhi,1981)
The Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Champalal 3. https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/indian-
Punjaji Shah [34] observed that,"while a speedy trial is an law/the-indian-constitution-guarantees-justice-to-all-
implied ingredient of a fair and reasonable trial, the inverse law-essay.php ( Visited on April 15, 2019)
is not compulsory to be true. A delayed trial is not 4. http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/1o6o3/1282
necessarily an unfair trial. The delay may be at some time 16/17/11_chapter%2o4.pdf (Visited on April 15, 2o19)
by the tactics or conduct of the accused itself. The delay 5. Nani A. Palkhivala, “We the Nation - Lost
may have caused no discrimination whatsoever to the decades”215-16,(UBS Publishers Distributors 1994)
accused. The question whether a conviction should be 6. Anil Rai v. State of Bihar, AIR 2oo1 SC 3173
disaffirm on the ground of delayed trial depends upon the 7. Kanahaiyalal Sharma, Reconstruction of the
facts and circumstances of the case. If the accused found to Constitution of India,242 ( Deep & Deep Publications,
have been favoritism in the conduct of his defence and it New Delhi,2oo2)
would be said that the accused had thus been denied of an 8. Ibid,p.129
sufficient opportunity to defend himself, the conviction 9. Article 21 of the Indian constitution: "No person shall
would certainly have to given. But if there is nothing for be deprived of his life or personal liberty except
shown and there are no situation entitling the court to raise a according to the procedure established by law.”
presumption regarding the accused that he had been 10. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, A.I.R.1950SC27
prejudiced there will be no justification to quash the 11. A.I.R. 1950 SC 27
conviction on the ground of delayed trial only". 12. Ibid,p.39
In another case [35], Justice Krishna Iyer suggested that 13. AIR 1978 SC 1548.
systematic slow motion in dispensation of Justice must 14. (1980) 1 SCC1o8.
claim the nation's immediate attention towards basic 15. (1992) 1 SCC 225.
reformation of the traditional structures and procedure, and (1986) 1 SCC 654.
therefore. Justice Krishna Iyer made the following 16. Supra note, 16
recommendation: 17. Klopfer V. North Carolina,(1967)386 US 213,
"Commercial cases should at which extent may be possible, 18. Puran singh & Another V. State, AIR 2o12 SC 29o7.
be adjusted by non-litigative mechanisms of dispute 19. https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/151571o2/?formI
resolution, since forensic processes, muffled and nput=speedy%2otrial%2oarticle%2o21 ( visited on
contentious hamper of the flow of trade and harm both sides April 15, 2019)
whosoever wins or lose." The necessity for the 20. Ibid
simplification of procedural laws is tto understand the 21. Sam Prakash v. State of Delhi, AIR 1974 SC 983.
intention behind law enactment. The simplified procedure 22. H.N. Rishbud v. State of Delhi, AIR 1955 SC 196.
will reduce the pendency of cases before the courts and 23. T.V. Vatheeswaran v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1983
renders the justice needed according time. In Hussainara SC 361
Khatoon vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar [36], the 24. Ibid.
Supreme Court observed that the litigants have a 25. AIR 1955 SC 792
fundamental right to speedy justice. In India, some of the 26. AIR 1971 SC 1367.
major procedural laws which invariably invite simplification 27. (1972) 3SCC 5o4
are: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Indian Evidence 28. (1978) 1SCC 248.

119
International Journal of Law

29. (1979)1SCC 514 -515.

30. (1980) 1SCC 81.
31. AIR 1952 SC 75.
32. Bhatia G.P, "Application of Right to speedy Public
Trial" Labour and Industrial cases
2oo5, Dec. 38 (456), p. 281-2
33. ibid
34. AIR 1981 SC1675
35. Trustee, Bombay Port v. Premier Automobiles, AIR
1974 SC 2122.
36. AIR 1979 SC1369
37. http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l297-Right-
To-Speedy-Trial.html ( Visited on April 16,219 )

120