Reopening of a Case

FACEBOOK THROWS UP old postings without warning and a 10-year-old one popped up on the feed. It was the first paragraph of the Aarushi case judgment, the conviction of the parents by the trial court, and went like this: “The cynosure of judicial deter­mination is the fluctuating fortunes of the dentist couple Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar, who have been arraigned for committing and secret­ing as also deracinating the evidence of commission of the murder of their own adolescent daughter—a beautiful damsel and sole heiress Ms. Aarushi and hapless domestic aide Hemraj, who had migrated to India from neighbour­ing Nepal to eke out living and attended routinely to the chores of domestic drudgery at the house of their masters.” Few speak or write like this because it makes convoluted what should be simple. In an essay writing competi­tion, such language would probably not be a contender for a prize.

It was interesting to be reminded of this after President Droupadi Murmu, on November 26, speaking on a Constitu­tion Day event organised by the Supreme Court, advocated for the creation of an All-India Judicial Service. Students from any field who wanted a career in the judi­ciary could enter it by passing a difficult exam along the lines of the UPSC that gives us bureaucrats. Many ills plague the judiciary today, from corruption to com­petence, especially at the lower levels. To give an example, the Supreme Court keeps telling the lower courts that denial of bail shouldn’t be the default option but with very little resonance. Or the many appeal judgments of the higher courts which seem to suggest no application of mind in what was passed earlier.

An exam wouldn’t be the silver bullet and we know that because the bureaucra­cy has more than its share of issues. But it will still be better than the present simply because there will be more competition and, because it is open to all, a vast broad subset of applicants would bring much-needed fresh blood to the institution bent under its own load. Such a service will assist in managing the massive backlog of cases and the longer it is put off, the problem is going to get more acute.

The idea for such a service was mooted as far back as the late 1950s in a law commission report. In later years, even the Constitution was amended to make it possible. And yet, it hangs in the balance because some stakeholders feel it encroaches on their territory. Two years ago, in a reply to a Parliament question, the law minister had stated: “There was divergence of opinion among the state governments and among the high courts on the constitution of All India Judicial Service. While some state governments and high courts favoured the proposal, some were not in favour of creation of All India Judicial Service while some others wanted changes in the proposal formu­lated by the Central government.”

There will always be dangers in any change but, once it is evident that reform is necessary, what alternative is there? To keep it perpetually in the backburner only means consequences in terms of what the judiciary is able to deliver.

About The Author

Madhavankutty Pillai

Madhavankutty Pillai has no specialisations whatsoever. He is among the last of the generalists. And also Open chief of bureau, Mumbai  

•