[Assam] Another One from ToI

[Chan Mahanta]

*** Mercifully the Supremes do GET IT on this one:
cm


India needs 10,000 more courts: Supreme Court
7 Feb 2009, 0216 hrs IST, TNN


NEW DELHI: Setting up more courts so that people have easier access 
to justice may be a good idea but it would be meaningless unless 
80-85% of the population had at least high school level education, 
the Supreme Court said on Friday.


A Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice P 
Sathasivam said establishing more courts alone would not solve the 
problem and cited a PIL on the death of over 4,000 tribals in road 
accidents in Sonebhadra district of UP where not a single victim's 
family got compensation.

"The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals are there but the illiterate 
tribals had no knowledge of how to exercise their legal rights for 
compensation, being ignorant about approaching the tribunals," the 
Bench said responding to the suggestions on judicial reforms by 
counsel Prashant Bhushan on a PIL.

To tackle the pendency of nearly 2.5 crore cases, there was an urgent 
need for an additional 10,000 courts, the CJI said. "But, 
establishing these courts alone will not give the desired result. To 
approach these courts for grievance redressal, there has to be 
awareness, which will come only when there is a rise in the education 
level among people," he said.

The CJI does not view the large number of cases in courts, popularly 
referred to as `docket explosion', as a major problem before the 
judiciary. But he feels `docket exclusion', meaning that needy have 
no knowledge of how to approach courts, could only be tackled through 
proper education.

He agreed with Bhushan that setting up of "gram nyayalayas" (village 
courts) was an important step towards giving litigants easy access to 
courts. But, he immediately qualified this by saying, "Most important 
is the education level of the masses. Unless 80% to 85% of the 
population has high school level education, there was no hope of 
people coming to courts for settling their disputes."


When Bhushan said the cost of litigation had sky rocketed in recent 
years and suggested that legal aid committees, which give free advice 
to poor litigants, were not functioning properly, the Bench was quick 
to throw the ball back into the counsel's court by saying that 
advocates like him should provide free services to litigants.


However, the court sought response from the Centre within six weeks 
on the PIL filed by NGO `Janhit Manch' on various suggestions for 
judicial reforms.