India’s Chained Judiciary, as we emerge from the horror, apathy, and tragedy of the hit-and-run case in Pune, another hit-and-run incident has occurred, this time involving the daughter of YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) Rajya Sabha MP Beeda Masthan, who has reportedly run over a man sleeping on a pavement in Chennai.

According to police reports, driving a luxury BMW car, the woman and another lady accompanying her fled the scene immediately after the incident; sadly, the deceased has been identified as 21-year-old painter Surya.

“He was sleeping on a pavement in Besant Nagar on Monday night when a luxury car driven by a woman ran over him, killing him,” a senior police official stated.

The Adyar Traffic Investigation Wing has registered a case under section 304 A of the IPC (causing death by negligence), a bailable offense, and issued summons to the car owner.

According to reports, the woman, identified as Madhuri, was later arrested and released on bail.

The Slow Poison

Madhuri’s swift release on bail reeks of a similar instance where a wealthy individual, if not caught by the public on the spot and subsequent protests, received royal treatment from those entrusted with upholding the law and was immediately released on bail following instructions to write an essay.

This also mirrors another famous case involving a movie personality that dragged on for years without resolution despite clear evidence of what happened.

It almost seems as if driving drunk and killing people is a “right” these individuals enjoy; even more sad and pathetic is that the law appears to be on their side.

Those in power protect these individuals, ensuring they have nothing to worry about. We may soon hear another ridiculous statement questioning the right of “lowly people” to sleep on the pavement in the first place!

Indian Judiciary Is A Joke

Consider the now infamous Pune Porsche case, which illustrates the shocking incompetence of our judges and magistrates.

An “enlightened” judge asked the young culprit to write an essay even after he had mowed down and killed two innocent, hardworking individuals.

In sharp contrasts are cases such as the one below and many more –

Rajasthan, 1992

Bhanwari Devi was gang-raped in the presence of her husband, who was tied up and beaten while she was brutalized. Employed by the Rajasthan government to report child marriages, she did her duty only to be “taught a lesson” by the family involved.

When she attempted to file an FIR against the perpetrators, the police demanded she deposit her ‘Lehnga’ as evidence. She had to cover her lower body with her husband’s blood-stained turban and walk three kilometers to her village.

Shockingly, the district court acquitted all the accused, making the following outrageous remarks in the judgment:

• It is hard to believe that the wife was raped in front of the husband and he didn’t retaliate.
• No uncle-nephew duo can commit rape.
• Upper-caste men cannot rape lower-caste women as it would disgrace their own caste.

This is the Indian judiciary—unbelievable but true!

Another Notorious Case

The entire country knows about this one, yet the contrast is stark.

Cricket czar Lalit Modi, charged with various criminal offences, once again demonstrated that the rich and powerful in India are above the law. Indian politicians from all parties were in contact with him, fully aware of his wrongdoings, proving that India’s ruling class lacks personal ethics.

Political immorality is the root of all evils in public life.

Indian politicians, industrialists, and celebrated actors are equally guilty.

Whether it’s Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa, Salman Khan, Manu Sharma (Jessica Lal murder case), or Varun Gandhi, the pattern is clear.

In these cases, witnesses often turn hostile, or the courts show remarkable urgency in absolving the so-called offenders of their crimes.

To aid the rich and powerful, police officers, witnesses, public prosecutors, judges—almost everyone involved—are either coerced, blackmailed, or bribed to ensure the process remains hassle-free and swift.

Another frequently employed method is to deliberately delay proceedings indefinitely.

It took 19 years for the courts to clear Jayalalithaa.

This is the grim reality of the Indian judiciary—a system in chains, controlled by those with wealth, influence, and power.

The Long, Expensive Road to Justice

A survey found that two minutes is the average time a judge spends on a hearing on a regular day—Two minutes!

This is just one of several alarming statistics about the Indian judiciary. The protracted duration of cases in Indian courts is a well-known fact.

But why is this the case? What can be done to remedy it? What does this delay signify from a rule of law perspective? What are its political, social, and economic costs?

These are some of the critical questions that judges, scholars, and various commissions have pondered but failed to answer definitively. Entire Law Commission reports have been dedicated to this issue.

Despite all the discussions, debates, and policy suggestions aimed at tackling this problem, little has changed. If we were to analyze the lack of progress and try to pinpoint reasons, two words come to mind: numbers and ownership.

Recent examples clearly show that the corruption thriving in India is the sinister ploy of the political class, cutting across party lines. The famous and the affluent use their “connections” and “money” to delay, sway, and “buy” witnesses or even go so far as to “disappear” them.

These instances clearly illustrate how such corruption obstructs constitutional principles, disrupts the rule of law, and undermines the will of the people for the personal and political gains of a few individuals.

It creates a dual reality for its citizens: a set of ideals enshrined in the constitution that affirm equality for all in the eyes of the law, contrasted with a dark underbelly where corrupt individuals sanction abuse of power and undermine the founding structures of the nation.

Corruption in high places in India is not only about money changing hands.

It is an elite club where people prefer to scratch each other’s backs, believing it is their moral responsibility to stand up for a friend in need.

What else could have made a singer of moderate repute claim that people sleeping on the sidewalks in Mumbai were responsible for their deaths when Salman Khan was convicted in the hit-and-run case?

Rich Indians have a ferocious sense of entitlement that has legitimized many inequalities in India.

It is also noteworthy that the Mumbai High Court took immediate steps to grant Salman Khan bail within two hours of his conviction.

Are the courts this prompt if a common man seeks bail?

The Long, Unseen Injustice

Recently, a man was released from prison after 32 years without ever having a case against him.

Following this, the Supreme Court ordered the identification of prisoners who have been incarcerated for years without a police complaint.

Yet, there was no media debate about these prisoners who have spent nearly their entire lives in confinement and no high society lamentation for such innocent souls.

It is evident that in India, a person is often judged on financial grounds and rarely on humanitarian ones—Who is to be blamed? No one but ourselves.

The Wheel

“Ordinary citizens” are ensnared in this long, vicious cycle of judicial delays, unlike the rich, famous, and powerful.

There is a glaring lack of focus on the relevant statistics; aside from the total number of pending cases (three crore cases, as media frequently reports) and some speculative projections of the time required to clear the backlog, very little is understood about the causes of delay.

For instance, what types of cases are clogging the system? Despite judges working extremely long hours, why is there no significant reduction in delays? Are judges in some states more efficient than others? How long do different types of cases stay in the system and why? How can we maximize judicial time?

These questions are crucial for reform, yet no systematic effort has been made until recently to gather data that could provide answers.

According to the data collected on more than 40 lakh pending cases across various courts in the country, the average pendency of a case in the 21 high courts for which data is available is about three years and one month (1,128 days).

In subordinate courts, the average time to a decision is nearly six years (2,184 days). Even assuming a case does not go to the Supreme Court (most cases do not), an average litigant appealing to at least one higher court is likely to spend more than 10 years in court.

If your case reaches the Supreme Court, the average time increases by at least three more years. Remember, these are only averages. If you are particularly unfortunate, you could find yourself on the wrong side of this average.

To put things in perspective, it has been revealed that cases from the 1940s and 1950s are still pending in courts!

Social Media Playing Its Part

Social media has recently stirred trouble for India’s powerful elite.

The masses have not only protested explicitly but have also pushed the system to deliver some semblance of justice. So, has society found a remedy to its ills via social media?

Not quite, as many went overboard demanding parole for Salman Khan, citing his role as a cultural icon. The deaths of a few hapless individuals 13 years ago seem insignificant in a country of a billion people. The rich man is always considered important, even when he harbors evil intentions.

The nexus between industry and politics is exceedingly tight, and the Indian media appears to have voluntarily aligned itself with this nexus. Media houses are openly affiliated with political parties, resulting in biased reporting.

This somewhat lethal combination has acquired the status of a “national truth” in India’s hierarchical society and is seldom questioned.

The behaviour of the rich is accepted at face value, with sentiments like “they are like that only!” and “Who will stand against a politically affiliated person?” prevailing.

Have we involuntarily given up?