Will the burden of old cases be reduced with the implementation of the new law? Know what is the truth

New Delhi : New laws have come into force in the country from July 1. The laws related to adjournments under Section 346 of the recently implemented Indian Civil Protection Code (BNSS) and Section 309 of the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) are the same. This makes it unlikely that there will be a quick disposal of pending cases in all courts. Frequent adjournments have been the biggest factor hindering more than five crore cases in the three-tier judicial system.

How many pending cases in which court

We have 4.5 crore cases pending in subordinate courts alone. The number of pending cases in the High Courts is touching 62 lakh. At the same time, the number of cases in the Supreme Court has crossed 83,800 as of July 1. Section 346 of the BNSS provides that “Proceedings in every inquiry or trial shall continue on a day-to-day basis until all the witnesses present have been examined. Unless the court finds it necessary to adjourn beyond the next day for reasons to be recorded.”

Swadeshi law implemented across the country from July 1, first FIR lodged in Gwalior, now justice will be available within 3 years

Provisions same as section 309 of CrPC

Section 309 of the CrPC, now replaced by the BNSS, had provisions similar to those of the newly enacted law. This included the procedure to be followed for rape cases, including that the investigation or trial was to be completed within a period of two months from the date of filing of the chargesheet. The provision relating to adjournment or postponement of trial as provided in Section 309 of the CrPC and now Section 346 of the BNSS is merely a legitimate expectation.

Not Shri 420, now say Shri 318, three new criminal laws will be implemented from today, know what all will change

How much impact will it have on pending cases?

Former law secretary P K Malhotra said the huge backlog of cases in courts, disproportionate number of judges to population, routine adjournment of cases at the instance of advocates and lack of use of technology, especially in lower courts, are major impediments to maintaining the timelines prescribed in law for deciding cases. However, Section 346(2) of the BNSS gives the judge unrestricted powers to adjourn a hearing even after the hearing has begun “for a reasonable time…” But the BNSS in Section 346(2)b limits adjournments to two for the first time: “Where the circumstances are beyond the control of a party, not more than two adjournments may be granted by the court after hearing the objections of the other party and for reasons to be recorded in writing.

New Criminal Laws: ‘Our law’ in Bihar from today, know under which section FIR will be registered

Average time taken per case is 3.30 minutes

Directives have been issued by the Supreme Court to subordinate courts to limit adjournments in the past, but these are rarely followed. Citing the findings of a 2017 study by Bengaluru-based legal think tank Daksh, our sister newspaper Times of India had earlier reported that an average of 87 cases are listed before a trial court judge per day. Nearly half of them are adjourned. “This is very high, considering that judges sit in open court for only five-and-a-half hours a day. This means that on an average, judges have a little over three-and-a-half minutes on each case,” the study had said.