Faith of citizens more in criminal justice than civil justice administration: NHRC chief
New Delhi, The faith of the common man in this criminal justice system is much more than the administration of civil justice, retired Supreme Court Judge Justice V Ramasubramanian said on Wednesday.
Ramasubramanian, who is the chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission , was speaking at the launch of the country's first comprehensive criminal law database titled 'The State of the System' by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy at the Constitution Club here, a release said.
"As a society, our psyche is tuned to convert all civil cases into criminal cases. As a lawyer, I have seen people who have lent money, who could not get their money back, they used to come to me and tell me that somehow you convert this into a criminal case, so that they get their money back.
"Therefore, despite all the pitfalls, you must admit this reality that despite all the pitfalls of the system of administration of criminal justice, the faith of the common man in this criminal justice system is much more than the administration of civil justice. They have more faith in criminal justice," the former apex court judge said.
The NHRC chairperson also spoke on the wide-ranging implications of excessive criminalisation from the three perspectives of the citizen's ease of living, the business community's compliance burden and the state's resource allocation.
During the event, a panel discussion was also held.
"The database documents every act and omission criminalised under 370 Union laws enacted over the last 174 years and spanning 45 subject areas. It aims to empower citizens, researchers and policymakers with a deeper understanding of the scope and extent of criminalisation in the country.
It highlights inconsistencies in the prescription of punishments and proposes a principled framework to guide future efforts towards decriminalisation and criminal law-making," the release said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
42 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Madras HC seeks report from top cop on pending IPC cases
CHENNAI: Questioning the discrepancies in the number of criminal cases pending at different stages as per the information furnished to the jurisdictional court and the statistics available with the police, the Madras High Court on Monday directed the Greater Chennai Police (GCP) Commissioner A Arun, who was present in the court as per an earlier order, to file a report on the pending cases registered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) till June, 2024. Justice P Velmurugan issued the direction while hearing a petition filed by V Vanamamalai, a resident of an apartment in Nolambur, seeking a direction to the police to register a case on alleged caste discrimination and abuse by a member of the flat owners' association. The judge flagged the frequent showdown between the police investigation officers (IOs) and the judicial officers. 'One of the reasons is that you are not submitting closure reports in the courts if any case is closed,' he said, adding it is mandatory to report to the court forthwith if any FIR is registered or closed. Final reports are also not properly submitted in the courts, he noted. The judge directed the commissioner to file a report on the cases under the IPC till the BNSS came into force, pendency at the stage of FIR, charge sheet or not having been taken on file of the judicial magistrate courts. He gave time till July 8 for filing the report.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
AI must be subordinate to fairness, equity, human dignity: Justice Surya Kant
Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant has said justice cannot be reduced to a digital product, warning that artificial intelligence (AI) must always remain subordinate to fairness, equity, and human dignity. 'Justice, unlike software, is not a product to be optimised, but a principle to be honoured. Technology must remain subordinate to our higher commitments to fairness, equity, and human dignity,' said Justice Kant, who is set to become the Chief Justice of India in November. Speaking at Microsoft's Fireside Chat on 'AI and Law' on June 6, Justice Kant cautioned that while AI promises to enhance access, efficiency, and transparency in the legal system, unchecked deployment could mirror and even magnify existing societal inequities. 'Technology, if left unchecked, can reflect and reinforce societal inequities. AI is not a perfect technology, and it can perhaps never replace the human element that the entire Rawlsian theory of justice hinges on,' he said. Rawlsian theory refers to the philosophy of justice developed by John Rawls, an American political philosopher. The core of the theory is the concept of 'justice as fairness', which aims to reconcile the seemingly competing values of freedom and equality. Justice Kant acknowledged the global nature of the challenges AI presents, particularly issues like algorithmic bias, hallucinated legal citations, and data protection. 'Take, for instance, the fictitious legal precedents that chatbots routinely come up with when faced with complex legal propositions,' said Justice Kant, warning of the risks of relying blindly on AI in sensitive domains like law. He spoke about growing cyber threats to courts and the judiciary, including ransomware attacks and doxing of judges, and said such digital risks were now 'a matter of constitutional resilience.' He said India has responded proactively, with secure e-filing platforms, the National Judicial Data Grid, and virtual hearings backed by multi-layered authentication. 'Cybersecurity is not a matter of IT hygiene, but of constitutional resilience…courts must invest not just in secure infrastructure, but in public confidence,' Justice Kant said. Justice Kant said the adoption of AI must not be driven by novelty or efficiency alone. 'We do so not as passive observers, but as stewards of a future we must shape with wisdom and purpose… Shaping the future demands more than innovation—it calls for an unwavering adherence to foundational values.' Justice Kant said India's judicial digital transformation, while ambitious, is being shaped through collaboration between technologists, judges, civil society, and academics via a dedicated Centre for Research and Planning within the Supreme Court. He referred to India's evolving legal-tech landscape and initiatives reshaping the courts including SUVAS, the Supreme Court's translation software that has enabled over 100,000 judgments in 18 regional languages, Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems in Constitution Bench hearings for real-time transparency, and LegRAA, a legal research tool that aids without replacing judicial reasoning. 'These technologies are designed explicitly to support, not supplant, human judgment. It preserves the essential human element of jurisprudence, ensuring that final legal Page 6 of 13 interpretations remain firmly rooted in wisdom, compassion, and ethical discernment,' he said. Justice Kant called for building AI systems that reflect functional competence and moral clarity. 'I remain firmly convinced that any contemplation of AI must be guided by a deep moral compass. Shaping the future demands more than for an unwavering adherence to foundational values. Transparency, equity, responsibility, and respect for human dignity must not be afterthoughts, but the pillars upon which all technological advancement rests…Let this dialogue between technologists and jurists be not the end, but the beginning of a sustained collaboration, one where justice and technology walk hand in hand, with the citizen always at the centre.'
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Apex court rejects plea filed by Tamil Nadu on education funds
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a plea by the Tamil Nadu government seeking an urgent hearing in its suit against the Union government for allegedly withholding over ₹2,000 crore in funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme (SSS), citing what the state described as 'coercive tactics' by the Centre to force the state to implement the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. 'For how long has this fund not been given? What is the urgency now?' a bench of justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan asked senior advocate P Wilson, who mentioned the matter on behalf of the Tamil Nadu government, seeking an expedited listing. As Wilson flagged the constitutional right to free and compulsory education of nearly 4.8 million students in the state being adversely impacted, the bench remained unconvinced and declined the request: 'The plea is rejected.' The brief exchange took place during the Supreme Court's ongoing summer recess, now designated as a period of 'partial court working days' where only two to three benches sit and only matters of pressing urgency are usually considered, in addition to some old cases where both sides have given their consent to argue during the break. The regular functioning of the top court will resume on July 14. Filed under Article 131 of the Constitution, Tamil Nadu's suit accuses the Centre of linking its annual share under the SSS to the implementation of the NEP 2020 and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme -- a condition the state calls 'unconstitutional, arbitrary and coercive.' According to the suit, the Project Approval Board had approved a total outlay of ₹3,585.99 crore for Tamil Nadu under the SSS for the financial year 2024–25, of which ₹2,151.59 crore was to be the Centre's 60% share. The state claims this amount was not released solely because of its principled opposition to NEP 2020. Tamil Nadu, ruled by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), has been a vocal critic of the NEP, particularly its three-language formula, which the state believes undermines its two-language policy rooted in Tamil linguistic pride and regional identity. 'The Union Government seeks to coerce the State to implement the NEP-2020 throughout the State in its entirety and to deviate from the education regime followed in the State,' the suit submitted, while asserting that the SSS is a standalone scheme that should not be tied to compliance with any other olicy. The suit further alleged that the withholding of funds 'cripples the implementation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009,' directly impacting 4.39 million students, 2.2 lakh teachers, and over 32,000 school staff in the state. The state's legal team has argued that the Centre's move violates the spirit of cooperative federalism and amounts to an 'usurpation' of the state's constitutional powers to legislate on education, which falls under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List. Tamil Nadu has also urged the Supreme Court to declare that the implementation of the NEP and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme, which mandates full compliance with NEP, is not binding on the state. It has sought a direction to the Centre to immediately release ₹2,291 crore (including interest), claiming the delay is 'not only illegal but also violative of constitutional morality.' While the plea for an urgent hearing has now been declined, the main suit continues to be listed for regular hearing. The standoff comes amid a broader constitutional tussle between the Tamil Nadu government and the Union government. On April 8, the Supreme Court struck down Tamil Nadu governor RN Ravi's controversial move to reserve 10 re-enacted state bills for presidential assent, and the matter is now part of a presidential reference pending before the top court.
