Analysis of 2024 SCMR 757: Inexpensive and Expeditious Justice
In 2024 S C M R 757, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addresses the fundamental duty of the state under Article 37(d) of the Constitution to ensure inexpensive and expeditious justice. The judgment critically examines the shortcomings in the legal and judicial systems, highlighting the necessity for judicial officers to protect fundamental rights and the state's responsibility to prevent frivolous litigation. This analysis delves into the key aspects of the judgment, focusing on the procedural flaws in the identification parade and broader systemic issues affecting the justice system.
The Duty of the State and Judiciary
Article 37(d) of the Constitution mandates the state to ensure that justice is affordable and swift. The failure to deliver timely justice not only breaches this constitutional mandate but also leads to public frustration and a lack of confidence in the legal system. The judgment emphasizes that judges must protect the fundamental rights of all individuals, including both the complainant and the accused, by discharging their duties impartially, without influence or pressure. The integrity and competence of judges are crucial in upholding justice and maintaining public faith in the judiciary.
Identification Parade and Its Flaws
The case under discussion revolves around the prosecution’s reliance on an identification parade and the recovery of an alleged amount from the respondents. The Magistrate's method of conducting the identification parade—by arranging under-trial prisoners and the respondents in five rows within the same premises—was flawed. This setup led to a combined and joint identification parade, which is legally invalid. The judgment highlights several critical points:
1. Combined Identification Parade: Conducting a joint identification parade undermines its validity. Each respondent should have been identified separately to ensure fairness.
2. Lack of Prior Descriptions: The witnesses did not provide specific features of the respondents before the identification parade. Such descriptions are essential for the Magistrate to arrange dummies with similar appearances.
3. Secrecy and Precaution: The police failed to maintain the secrecy of the detainees’ identities, as the respondents were seen in the police lock-up and their photographs were published in newspapers. This exposure could influence the witnesses' identification.
4. Delayed Identification: The identification parade occurred more than two years after the incident, making it improbable for witnesses to remember the respondents accurately.
These flaws led to the conclusion that the identification parade had no evidentiary value, and the respondents were identified based on previous exposure rather than independent recognition.
Broader Issues in the Justice System
The judgment also discusses broader issues affecting the justice system, including:
1. Poor Investigation: Many genuine cases result in acquittal due to inadequate or corrupt investigations, lack of modern equipment, and insufficient training for investigators.
2. Frivolous Litigation: The state must take steps to curb false and frivolous litigation, which wastes judicial resources and prolongs genuine cases.
3. Delays in Trials: Unreasonable delays in concluding trials and appeals challenge the principles of liberty, fair trial, and due process. These delays are attributed to the overburdened judicial system and lack of basic facilities.
Recommendations for Improvement
The court underscores the need for systemic improvements to ensure timely and fair justice:
1. Filling Judicial Vacancies: Immediate appointment of judicial officers on merit and increasing the number of judges where necessary.
2. Upgrading Investigation Mechanism: Introducing modern techniques, tools, and regular training for investigating officials.
3. Ensuring Independence and Safety: Providing a conducive environment and ensuring the safety of judicial officers, investigators, and witnesses.
4. Legislative Reforms: Amending existing laws or enacting new legislation to prevent abuse of the legal process and encourage judicial efficiency.
The judgment concludes that until such systemic changes are implemented, courts must utilize their existing powers to deliver justice and discourage malicious litigation.
Conclusion
The 2024 S C M R 757 judgment serves as a critical reminder of the state's duty to ensure justice is both affordable and timely. It highlights significant procedural flaws in the legal process and calls for comprehensive reforms to address these issues. By emphasizing the roles and responsibilities of judges, investigating officers, and the state, the judgment aims to restore public faith in the justice system and uphold the constitutional mandate of expeditious and inexpensive justice.