Slide 2
The aim of the Criminal Justice System is to punish the guilty and
protect the innocent and is to reduce the level of criminality in society
by ensuring maximum detection of reported crimes, conviction of the
accused persons without delay, awarding appropriate punishments to
the convicted.
The Criminal law in India is contained in a number of sources – The
Indian Penal Code of 1860, the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955,
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
CJS can impose penalties on those who violate the established laws.
The criminal law and criminal procedure are in the concurrent list of the
seventh schedule of the constitution.
Slide 3
Ancient:
The jurisprudence of Ancient India, which was shaped by the concept of
‘Dharma’, prescribing various rules of right conduct.
The distinction between a civil wrong and a criminal offence was clear.
While civil wrongs related mainly to disputes arising over wealth, the
concept of pātaka or sin was the standard against which crime was to be
defined.
The Mauryas had a system of rigorous penal system which prescribed
mutilation as well as the death penalty for even trivial offences.
During the Gupta’s era, the judiciary consisted of the guild, the folk
assembly or the council and the king himself.
Medieval :
India was subjected to a series of invasions, beginning in the 8th
Century A.D. and ending in the 15th century, stabilizing by the time of
Mughal Rule.
They followed a criminal law that classified all offences on the basis of
the penalty which each merited, including retaliation (blood for blood),
specific penalties for theft and robbery and discretionary penalties.
Present:
The Criminal Justice System in India follows the legal procedures
established by the British during the pre-independence era.
In 2000, the government formed a panel headed by Justice V.S.
Malimath, the former Chief Justice of Kerala and Karnataka, to suggest
reform in the century-old criminal justice system.
In 2003, the Justice Malimath Committee submitted a report with 158
recommendations.
The Committee submitted that the existing system “weighed in favour of
the accused and did not adequately focus on justice to the victims of
crime.
Slide 6
Justice to the victims: The victim should be allowed to participate in
cases involving serious crimes and also be given adequate
compensation. If the victim is dead, the legal representative shall have
the right to implead himself or herself as a party, in case of serious
offences. The State should provide an advocate of victim’s choice to
plead on his/her behalf and the cost has to be borne by the state if the
victim can’t afford it.
Presumption of Innocence: The courts follow “proof beyond reasonable
doubt” as the basis to convict an accused in criminal cases which is an
unreasonable burden on the prosecution and hence a fact should be
considered as proven “if the court is convinced that it is true” after
evaluating the matters before it.
Separate criminal division in higher courts: The higher courts should
have a separate criminal division consisting of judges who have
specialised in criminal law.
Central law for organized crime and terrorism: A central law must be
enacted to deal with organised crime, federal crimes, and terrorism.
Offences classification: It should be changed to the social welfare code,
correctional code, criminal code, and economic and other offences code
instead of the current classification of cognisable and non-cognisable.
Director of Prosecution: A new post, Director of Prosecution, should be
created in every state to facilitate effective coordination between the
investigating and prosecuting officers.
SP in each district: Appointment of an SP in each district to maintain
crime data, an organisation of specialised squads to deal with organised
crime.
