The Supreme Court has ruled that a weak and compromised criminal justice system undermines the rule of law and thus encourages corruption, authoritarianism and the rule of the powerful and privileged.
“An effective and responsive criminal justice system, free from political interference and corruption, is a fundamental right of every citizen while inexpensive and expeditious justice is a commitment of the State under the Constitution. The criminal justice system will only serve its purpose when the actual stakeholders, the people of this country, will have trust and confidence in a system which is free, accessible, impartial, responsive, independent and free from corruption or any other influence.
“It is, therefore, a constitutional duty of every organ of the State, the executive, judiciary and the legislature to take urgent steps so as to ensure that the criminal justice system serves the people of this country and they repose their trust and confidence in its fairness, impartiality and independence”, reads a 20-page judgement authored by Justice Athar Minallah, which commuted the death sentence of an inmate imprisoned for the past 25 years into life imprisonment.
A three-member bench of the apex court led by Justice Minallah heard the criminal appeal in a murder case. The judgement notes that the appellant has remained incarcerated for more than 25 years.
“The appellant had escaped from judicial custody and that obviously constitutes a separate offence and, therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to make any observation lest it may prejudice the case of the parties in any matter that may be pending before a competent court/forum.”
The appellant was young in 1991 when the occurrence had taken place. He was accompanying his father and the motive was attributed to him and not the appellant.
It cannot be ruled out that the appellant may have acted under the influence of his elders, particularly his father. He did not have any criminal record prior to the occurrence and, therefore, he was a first time offender.
The court further noted the recovery of the fire arm weapon is not free from doubt and the evidence brought on record in this regard is not safe to be relied upon.
In addition to these recognized mitigating factors, the appellant has served the full term prescribed for the alternate punishment of imprisonment for life without the benefit of remissions.
“We are, therefore, of the opinion that on account of these mitigating and extenuating circumstances, the sentence of death on five counts was not justified. We, therefore, partly allow the appeal only to the extent of modifying the sentence of death on five counts to imprisonment for life on five counts. The sentences, except those required to be served in default of payment of compensation, shall run concurrently. The benefit under section 382b of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is extended in favour of the appellant,” says the judgement.
The court lamented on the abysmal condition of the criminal justice system in general and the unjustified delays in the ultimate disposal of cases in which the appellant or petitioner has challenged the sentence of death. In the case before the court, the appellant was sentenced to death by the trial court on September 3, 2008. The appeal was preferred within time.
“The High Court decided the appeal on September 18, 2014, and the reference was answered in the affirmative and, thus, the sentence of death was confirmed. There is six years delay in deciding the appeal of a prisoner who has been handed down the sentence of death which cannot be justified.”
The necessary time for taking up the appeal and its ultimate disposal should not have been more than 12 months, stated the apex court.
“The appellant had then sought leave by filing a petition before this Court and the necessary and reasonable time required for its final disposal should not have been more than twelve months.”
The petition, which was filed in 2014, was for the first time fixed for hearing after seven years i.e on March 22, 2021, and finally on January 29, 2025. It took more than 17 years for the appeal process to complete from the date when the death sentence was handed down.
“The condemned prisoner was in a death cell and he was not responsible in any manner for this inordinate delay nor were the procedures in his control.”
The delay had definitely exceeded the necessary and reasonable time required for the appellate procedures to be completed.
This inordinate delay brings the criminal justice system into disrepute and undermines the confidence of the people in the courts and the criminal justice system. The abysmal conditions in most of the overcrowded prisons across the country and the inhumane and degrading conditions often reported not only adds to the unimaginable agony and hardship of a condemned prisoner but becomes a form of unauthorized punishment not intended by the legislature.
The court also noted that the judiciary is no doubt responsible when the process of appeal exceeds the necessary and reasonable time required for its completion, but the other branches of the State, the executive and legislature, are also equally responsible for ensuring that the conditions in the prisons are humane and that the treatment of prisoners is not cruel, inhuman and degrading.
“It is an onerous task of the High Courts and this Court to ensure that the appeal process and remedies provided under the law are completed within the time which is necessary and reasonable for this purpose.”
The executive branch is equally responsible to ensure that treatment of the inmates of a prison is not cruel, degrading and inhumane.
“The legislature is also expected to review the legislation with the object of making the criminal justice system responsive to the needs of the citizens and accountable for violations of their rights.”
The unauthorized punishment which an inmate of a prison is forced to endure on account of a compromised, weak and failing justice system cannot be legalized nor condoned. We have noted with concern that most of the victims of the inordinate delays in completion of the appellate process are those who are financially so weak that they cannot even afford to engage a lawyer of their choice.
“It appears that the criminal justice system, from the stage of investigation to the fixation of appeals, is vulnerable to be exploited by the privileged and powerful while the victims are those who belong to politically, economically and socially marginalized and underprivileged classes.”
Every branch of the State having a role in the running of the criminal justice system is under an obligation to take urgent steps to remedy the wrongs. A system which fails in protecting and enforcing the rights alienates the actual stakeholders; the people of this country.”
