Policy of Judges to Achieve End of Justice

Image via Wikipedia

Policy of Judges to Achieve End of Justice

By

S j Tubrazy

Policy of judges, be he the Chief Justice of the Court or a Judge was a law and law alone and nothing else and rest were internal arrangement and understandings for achieving the ends provided by law. Normal civil and criminal Courts were expected to decide cases by dispensing the justice and, not by disposing cases. Quality of justice and not the number of cases decided, which was requirement of dispensation of justice. Quick or hurried conclusion of cases was good and delay in dispensation of justice was really denying it, but balance had to be struck between delayed justice and hasty justice. If delay ensured justice, nothing bad in it, though not in good taste, but if haste would distant justice, it was worse than the delay. Direction of by apex court to decide a murder case within prescribed period, would not mean that it should necessarily take prescribed time or that it should not go beyond that, if accused admitted his guilt before the Court, case could stand decided even within days, but if there was an eventuality when witnesses were not available, Judge or counsel representing party or party itself was indisposed or the Courts closed for summer or winter vacation, or Judge availed leave or it was otherwise not possible to complete the trial within prescribed time that would not mean that arrangement desired was violated. Purpose was to expedite process and cases should not remain piled up.