Lessons from Nirbhaya

 Given the horrific brutality of the case, the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder had shaken the conscience of the nation. The grotesque Nirbhaya gangrape-murder case of December 2012 gets a closure with the four death row convicts- Mukesh, Vinay Sharma, Akshay Singh and Pawan Gupta- having exhausted the legal remedies in the seven-year trial, have been finally sentenced to execution on January 22. In an open and shut case such as this one, the wait for justice has been too long. One can only imagine how the victim’s family had waited for justice during all of the seven years that the case dragged on. If such a high profile case can’t reach finality even after seven long years, then the law can hardly hold much deterrence value. While the case has elicited nationwide outrage and demands for death penalty as deterrence, the push forward suffered a setback as the spate of gruesome attacks continued – Unnao, Kotkhai and Hyderabad, to name a few. They expose the weaknesses in the system as tardy implementation persists. Shoddy investigations deny the survivors their right to timely justice. Infamous for its distinct record of pending cases, the Indian Judiciary has been struggling to dispose of a colossal number of cases which are estimated to be around 30 million. The ratio of judges per citizens is alarmingly low with 17 judges per 1 million citizens. Even after 70 years of independence, India is still under the grasp of delayed decisions and denied justice. Among the prominent cases include the 1984 anti- Sikh riots which still await a final decision with many of the accused and those seeking justice having died in the long 32-year wait. The inherent practice of review petitions filed at different stages with the Supreme Court have delayed justice in many cases .This only reinforces the perception that the wheels of justice move excruciatingly slowly in this country. It can be worse if the accused happen to be politically powerful. This then creates a sense of impunity and directly feeds into a yearning for vigilantism. Public celebrations at the police encounter of the four accused in the recent Hyderabad gang rape, murder and burning case exemplify people’s frustration – with no one raising the question that it was the same police who failed the victim when she was alive by quarrelling over jurisdictions. The inadequate number of judges is a major reason behind delay in disposal of cases. Thus, the main cause of judicial procrastination is not in the hand of judiciary but in the hand of executive and administrative wings. Focusing on capacity alone won’t reduce delays. A pervasive reason for delays is adjournments. A study by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy (VCLP) conducted on Delhi HC found that in 91 per cent of cases delayed over two years, adjournments were sought and granted. Merely increasing the number of judges won’t help because adjournments are acceptable in our judicial system. These encourage delaying tactics, block judicial time, prevent effective case management and impoverish litigants. The resultant frustration provokes a misguided desire for summary trial and death for the accused as robust law enforcement continues to be elusive. Effective deterrence can emanate from sure, strict and swift justice. Institutional reforms that lead to better policing, investigation and forensics, accountability and faster courts are needed to prevent further assaults on women.