CHALLENGES FOR THE SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN INDIA: FINDING TRUTH WITHIN THE ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM- A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INDIA AND ENGLAND

Abstract

The most crucial objective in the preamble of the Indian Constitution is to secure Justice. The Indian justice system is a complicated, multidimensional institution that has a long history of development as well as current difficulties. Enshrined in the Indian Constitution, the principle of guaranteeing fair and equal justice lies at the heart of the country's legal architecture. But there are major problems with the system that make it less efficient. One significant problem is the excessive backlog of cases. An ineffective case management system and a lack of judges are contributing factors to this backlog. In addition, socioeconomic constraints and the difference in access to justice between urban and rural communities point to a persisting injustice in the legal system. Being influenced by the Common law, we have followed the adversarial system for our Criminal procedures. While the goal of an adversarial system is to bring about the best of evidence in a competitive environment, the goal of inquisitorial system is to envisage the findings of truth through the endeavours of the Judge. The point being that the Indian criminal procedure system is equipped sufficiently to bring out the Truth, something which is considered the goal of inquisitorial system at the same time maintaining the fairness and impartiality in the trial by broadly confining itself to the adversarial system. The problem however lies in the way the adversarial system is implemented in India. On the Prosecution side, the duties of presenting the truth before the Courts is often foregone in the zeal to secure convictions. Prosecutors are enjoined to state the facts, however, external considerations such as the promotion policy and the pressures from the police department often lead them to forego certain piece of evidence or to mould the facts so that the Conviction is secured. On the defence side, we deal with the accused who in vast majority of cases are illiterate or belong to low socio-economic class for whom the maxim,”ignorantia juris non excusat” operates way too harshly. The success of adversarial system depends on Oral testimonies and Cross examinations all of which requires a lawyer adept in his art. To afford such defence counsel is a dream for vast majority of Indians. Further, the stringent bail provisions, the hesitancy of magistrates to exercise discretion under the above mentioned inquisitorial-like provisions, the normalcy of torture methods to extract confessions and overtly long trials makes the adversarial system operate contrary to its goals of fairness and impartiality. Truth, it seems is lost in the process. The comparative study of India and England consequently provides a framework for examining how an adversarial system can better reconcile the pursuit of truth with the fundamental requirements of fairness and justice.