The blindness Indian judiciary
Two consecutive dates 31st July and 1st August are notable for those who study about Indian judiciary.
31st July- Court sentenced Sanjay Dutt for 6 years imprisonment.
1st August- Maudhany was acquitted.
Let us compare the two cases. Maudhany was acquitted after a long term of 9 years in jail without getting a bail. But Sanjay Dutt had to stay in jail only for one and half years. For the rest twelve and half years, he was out of the jail gaining a bail.
That is, in India an innocent person had to stay in jail for nine years. But a guilty person was bailed for 12 years. The way the courts reacted in both the cases is shameful for the Indian judiciary.
Indians may be in the first place in the abuse of all kinds of laws. In the nations except in India, an ordinary police constable can fine the prime minister or the president of that nation if he hadn't followed the traffic rules. This not possible in India. It is because of these reasons, many writers say that Indian judiciary needs to be reformed.
Law enforcers think that what is the problem present with Indian judiciary at present. Actually, Indian judiciary is full of problems. The problems of Indian judiciary start even from its symbol. The symbol that is widely accepted is that of a woman whose eyes are tied with a piece of cloth holding a balance in her hands. Does it mean that the laws are blind? Does it mean that one who depends on court have to sing a song meaning that judges are blind like doorposts?
The problems are not only associated with the symbol but also with the laws. For example, in India, for those who attempted for suicide will be imprisoned for 1 year according to section 309 of Indian penal code. But in progressed nations suicide attempt is not a penal offence. What can be told about a judiciary which imprisons such a person instead of making arrangements to treat him mentally.
Indian judiciary is full of these types of nonsense. Why should we obey these type of ridiculous acts that even judges will make fun of at. (Eg- A judge proclaimed that 'IPC 309is not suitable for humans after acquitting an old woman who attempted to suicide.) If we do, will the world tease the Indians as non reactive or dead?
The law which restricts the use of guns by the public is welcomed. Otherwise, what happened in Virginia will continue to happen in India. The order of the court to imprison Sanjay Dutt even after it had been proved he kept AK-56 only for self protection needs to be condemned in strong words. His action may be against constitution. A man protects himself if others can't protect him. If one can protect himself from the attacks abiding the rules, and law gives protection to the people, how could all those3000 people could die in the religious riot of 2002 in Gujarat. So the law doesn't give protection to the people. So Sanjay Dutt was forced to buy the gun. If Sanjay Dutt was fined instead of being imprisoned, it will be a punishment based on justice.
Because of these reasons, we can say that Indian judiciary needs to be reformed. Otherwise, the dream of a progressed India in 2020 will not be materialised.
Two consecutive dates 31st July and 1st August are notable for those who study about Indian judiciary.
31st July- Court sentenced Sanjay Dutt for 6 years imprisonment.
1st August- Maudhany was acquitted.
Let us compare the two cases. Maudhany was acquitted after a long term of 9 years in jail without getting a bail. But Sanjay Dutt had to stay in jail only for one and half years. For the rest twelve and half years, he was out of the jail gaining a bail.
That is, in India an innocent person had to stay in jail for nine years. But a guilty person was bailed for 12 years. The way the courts reacted in both the cases is shameful for the Indian judiciary.
Indians may be in the first place in the abuse of all kinds of laws. In the nations except in India, an ordinary police constable can fine the prime minister or the president of that nation if he hadn't followed the traffic rules. This not possible in India. It is because of these reasons, many writers say that Indian judiciary needs to be reformed.
Law enforcers think that what is the problem present with Indian judiciary at present. Actually, Indian judiciary is full of problems. The problems of Indian judiciary start even from its symbol. The symbol that is widely accepted is that of a woman whose eyes are tied with a piece of cloth holding a balance in her hands. Does it mean that the laws are blind? Does it mean that one who depends on court have to sing a song meaning that judges are blind like doorposts?
The problems are not only associated with the symbol but also with the laws. For example, in India, for those who attempted for suicide will be imprisoned for 1 year according to section 309 of Indian penal code. But in progressed nations suicide attempt is not a penal offence. What can be told about a judiciary which imprisons such a person instead of making arrangements to treat him mentally.
Indian judiciary is full of these types of nonsense. Why should we obey these type of ridiculous acts that even judges will make fun of at. (Eg- A judge proclaimed that 'IPC 309is not suitable for humans after acquitting an old woman who attempted to suicide.) If we do, will the world tease the Indians as non reactive or dead?
The law which restricts the use of guns by the public is welcomed. Otherwise, what happened in Virginia will continue to happen in India. The order of the court to imprison Sanjay Dutt even after it had been proved he kept AK-56 only for self protection needs to be condemned in strong words. His action may be against constitution. A man protects himself if others can't protect him. If one can protect himself from the attacks abiding the rules, and law gives protection to the people, how could all those3000 people could die in the religious riot of 2002 in Gujarat. So the law doesn't give protection to the people. So Sanjay Dutt was forced to buy the gun. If Sanjay Dutt was fined instead of being imprisoned, it will be a punishment based on justice.
Because of these reasons, we can say that Indian judiciary needs to be reformed. Otherwise, the dream of a progressed India in 2020 will not be materialised.
.jpg)