You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Is law really equal for all in India?


    Are you wondering whether the law is really equal for all in India? Follow this discussion and share your opinion about legal equality in India.

    He got acquitted in the black buck case for want of evidence. Earlier he got bail in the drunken driving case. The witnesses against him vanish in thin air. Is it rule of law?

    First Indian novelist of modern era, Bankim Chandra Chattyopadhyay was himself a Deputy Magistrate in British India. He wrote more than 150 years ago: "Law? It is only a joke. The riches can enjoy this joke by spending money". (Translated from Bengali by Partha Kansabanik). Bankim-Babu! What an observation! Your remark is more true in today's India!

    Being Human! LOL!
  • #573036
    Prior to the year 1726, the Mughal legal system was prevailing in India. Three courts at Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta (now Chennai, Mumbai, and Kolkata respectively) were opened by the British India Company in India in the year 1726. Later after victory in Battle of Plassey and by 1772 , courts were opened in the other cities also by the company.
    Just consider the plight of native Indian subjects during the period of Mughal legal system. During Mughal era, the administration of justice was regarded by the Muslim kings as a religious duty.
    During that period, the personal laws of the non-Muslims were applied in civil matters, but only the Muslim laws were applied in criminal cases. In the case of a conflict between Islamic Law and laws of the Hindus, the former used to prevail.
    We have progressed much since then.
    Now we have the largest written Constitution of the world, which is the supreme law of the land. It provides for equality to all together with Articles regarding caste based reservations.
    Still Vijay Mallyas' and Lalit Modis' have options to settle in London.

    Let us encourage each other in sharing knowledge.

  • #573039
    When there are two or more sides to an issue and the judgement favour one, the other(s) may feel bad. A judge can take cognisance of the evidences produced, the witness statements on oath, and sometimes the convincing circumstantial evidences. Then he has to rely or refer to precedents etc. After all this only a judge passes the order.
    For outsiders not party to the case and court proceedings, it will be mostly prejudiced personal opinion. Our opinion could due to our personal convincing and conscience, mass psychology on a matter, opinion in media and even hearsay. Many times we may not be able to make out the real truth, unless we ourselves are witnesses to what happened.
    In public cases the Public prosecutor ( the actual designations may vary) is responsible to present the case on behalf of the public(government/police). The strength of that side will depend upon the evidence and witness collected and presented in a coherent way by the Police and public prosecutor.
    Also it will be the responsibility of the PP to apprise court if he fears that witness may be influenced, evidence destroyed or tampered with
    Some cases may fail to convict the accused for want of undisputable convincing evidence. But there will be further levels of appeal. Just because the judgement came against our expectation should not mean that it is wrong.
    Even when aberrations happen here and there, it is still the law that ultimately protects and takes care of the weak and punishes the guilty. If as public there is some doubt or confusion in the minds of people, and they have knowledge of the facts and truth, it is their duty to collect proper evidence, witness and also help the PP and police to the maximum extent of making the case a watertight one so that the real guilty is punished. If there are some loopholes in any law, then the [people and their representative legislators and parliament members should take up and enact remedies.

    Our system is such that when even the accused is a poor man and not able to engage a lawyer, the court arranges a lawyer to him for making his defence. So let us not become desperate and spread confusion in public mind and shake the confidence and faith vast majority has on judiciary and courts of law.

    ==================================
    Let us keep faith on ourselves and work sincerely, not leave everything to fate.

  • #573050
    Indian law is equal for every one.
    But as you said rich person are escaping from getting punished, because there is some fault in our laws, which is not known to the common man. That is known to to the advocates ( experienced and senior ) , and they charge very high fees. And they can only be hired by rich people. Also the law maker ( Bureaucrats) they get sold in front of rich criminals, so it is obvious they get escaped. Tahts why we think that law is different for rich person and poor person. If you want to get your rights then read law books, get updated and fight to get your rights, and do not complain that law is different for other.
    Rich people get escaped because of their money, power, lack of evidence, and witness.
    The common man or poor man does not raise voice against this and so they are the real culprit of any kind of mistake.

  • #573052
    #573050: I fail to understand how bureaucrats are coming to picture in respect of the judiciary. Hapless bureaucrats!
    “Whenever I feel the need to exercise, I lie down until it goes away.” - Paul Terry

  • #573065
    A classic example of legal cases is as follows -
    Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court had found the then Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi guilty of electoral malpractices and on 12.06.1975 declared the election verdict in the Rae Bareilly constituency 'null and void', barring Indira Gandhi to hold elected office for six years.
    The Supreme Court of India formally overturned the conviction on 07.11.1975.

    Let us encourage each other in sharing knowledge.

  • #573067
    There are many people who are escaping punishments for the crimes they did. They are either rich or related to the rich. The dialogue "Give Rs. 100 to me or Pay Rs. 1000 as fine" is common not only in movies but also in real life. As I travel in auto rickshaws everyday, I observe many drivers experiencing this situation. So, I say the law is not really equal for all in India. This situation changes only when the corruption in our country is eradicated and there is a 99.99% chance that it won't happen.

    Let us continue learning.

  • #573138
    The Government (State Governments) can at least initiate witness protection programmes to allow the witnesses to give their versions before the Court against the high & mighty.
    “Whenever I feel the need to exercise, I lie down until it goes away.” - Paul Terry


Sign In to post your comments