Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 26

DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that the work reported in the B.B.A., LL.B (Hons.) Project Report entitled
“ROLE OF LAW IN ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE” submitted at Chanakya National Law
University, Patna is an authentic record of my work carried out under the supervision of MR.
MANORANJAN KUMAR. I have not submitted this work elsewhere for any other degree or
diploma. I am fully responsible for the contents of my Project Report.

(Signature of the Candidate)

Niharika Bhati

Chanakya National Law University, Patna

August, 2019

1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to my guide Mr.
Manoranjan Kumar. for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement
throughout the course of this thesis. The blessing, help and guidance given by him time to time
shall carry me a long way in the journey of life on which I am about to embark.

I am obliged to staff members of Chanakya National Law University, for the valuable
information provided by them in their respective fields. I am grateful for their cooperation
during the period of my assignment.

Lastly, I thank almighty, my parents, brother, sisters and friends for their constant
encouragement without which this assignment would not be possible.

Thank you!

2
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

To study about the Role of Law in the Administration of Justice and its effect on society at large
with its evolution.

RESEARCH QUESTION
The evolution of law in determination of Justice and its impact on state, people, society and
citizen. Whether justice can be administered without law and the importance of justice in
administration of law.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The method of writing followed in the course of the research project is primarily analytical.
Doctrinal method of research has been used to complete this project. The researcher has followed
a uniform mode of citation.

SOURCES OF DATA

PRIMARY- The Constitution of India, 1950.

SECONDARY- Books, journals and internet.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A comprehensive review of literature is an essential part of any scientific investigation. It is
necessary for the researcher to acquaint herself with the work done in the past which induces
insight into the problem for further work.

STYLE OF WRITING
The researcher will be using both descriptive and analytical styles of writing.

MODE OF CITATION
The researcher will be using a uniform mode of citation throughout this paper.

3
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
Though the researcher will try her level best not to leave any stone unturned in doing this project
work to highlight various aspects relating to the topic, but the topic is so dynamic field of law,
the researcher will sight with some of unavoidable limitations. The limitations encountered by
the researcher were the paucity of time.

4
CHAPTERIZATION

CHAPTER 1. Administration of Justice.


CHAPTER 2. Various Approaches to the Concept of Administration of Justice.
CHAPTER 3. Jurisprudence and Justice.
CHAPTER 4. Relationship of Laws with Justice.
CHAPTER 5. Importance of Justice.
CHAPTER 6. Law, Justice and Equity.
CHAPTER 7. Conclusion.
Bibliography

5
1. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
 MEANING OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:-

Administration of Justice implies justice in accordance with the law. The judiciary's function is
to protect and enforce individuals ' rights and punish wrongdoers. This role is called
'administration of justice.' Adjudicating individuals ' rights and duties on the basis of the state's
rule is administering justice.

According to Salmond : -

“The administration of justice implies the maintenance of right within a political community by
civilized substitute for the primitive practice of private vengeance and violent self-help1.” This
was criticized on the ground that the obedience of law is not secured by the force of the state
alone. There are a number of other variables that assist in the obedience of legislation, such as
social sanctions, habit and comfort. Obedience to law becomes a matter of habit in civilized
societies, and in very rare instances the state’s force is used to secure it.

According to Austin:-

“Law is the aggregate of rule set by men as politically superior, or sovereign, to men as
politically subject.” It means law is command of sovereign. In his definition Command, duty and
sanction are the three elements of law.

The fundamental difference between the two jurists ' definitions is that whereas the central
point of law is sovereign in Austin's definition, the central point is Court in Salmond's definitio
n. In fact, both definitions are not perfect and two aspects of the law are presented.

Salmond:-

Points out that men do-not have one reason in them and each is moved by his own interest and
passions. The only alternative is one power over men. Men is by nature a fighting animal and
force is the ultima ratio of all mankind. As Hobbes puts it “ without a common power to keep
them all in awe, it is not possible for individuals to live in society. Without it injustice is

1
SALMOND’S JURISPRUDENCE, PAGE 90.

6
unchecked and triumphant and the life of the people is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.”
Salmond says however orderly a society may be, the element of force is always present and
operative. It may become latent but still exists2.

 ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMEMT OF THE CONCEPT OF ADMINISTRATION OF


JUSTICE:-

The origin and development of judicial administration is the same as man's origin and
development. A man's social nature demanded that he be required to live in society and be
exposed to a conflict of interest in the process. That created the need to provide for justice
3
administration .
Every individual had to punish the wrong doers in the days of primitive society or defend himself
without any outside agency help. It was not, however, a satisfying and uniform stance, and c
onsequently the State's need for force to protect the interests of the weak and infirm had fallen.
The justice in its initial stage was administered by elder men who were persons of position and
social status.
The King subsequently took over the function. Gradually a notion created that violating state law
was not a personal mistake, but a public
wrong, and it was up to the state to punish the wrongdoers. As per Dr. Julius Stone 4 , human
needs require a productive system for providing justice rather than a situation of frustration and
unbelief. The judicial system in its present State reflects awareness of the many facets of the
search for justice.

 CONCEPT OF JUSTICE ACCORDING TO LAW:-

The courts give justice to the people. Rendered justice must always comply with the law.
However, the courts are not always rendering justice. That's because judges aren't lawmakers,
they're just law interpreters.
It is not the court's duty to correct the legal defects. The judges ' only role is to administer the law

2
Mahajan, V.D., ‘Jurisprudence and Legal Theory’, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, Fifth Edition, 2017.
3
Mahajan, V.D., ‘Jurisprudence and Legal Theory’, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, Fifth Edition, 2017.
4
STONE J., SOCIAL DIMENSIONS OF LAW & JUSTICES, 1966.

7
as the legislature has done. Consequently, in the modern state, the law
based administration of justice is commonly regarded as ' implying recognition of fixed rules. '

 COURTS AS INSTRUMENTS FOR JUSTICE:-

Judiciary is a state organ through which the judiciary is administered. In this context, the courts
are referred to as the tools for achieving this objective of justice. There are various views on the
court's role vis-à-vis the Executive and Legislature. The latest trend of the judgment
demonstrates that it is anticipated that the judiciary will interpret the law as it stands and will not
replace their own wisdom or vision against the law 5 . Nevertheless, the notion of judicial
independence implies that if the regulations are ultra-vires, or there is ambiguity, the competent
tribunal is the best judge to decide on the validity or otherwise of such law.

 KINDS OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:-

The administration of justice may be divided into two parts:-

1) Civil. 2) Criminal.

1. Administration of Civil Justice:-

The wrongs that are the subject of civil proceedings are called civil wrongs. Two types (1) of
primary and (2) of sanctioning or remedial rights are the rights enforced by civil proceedings.
The primary right is those rights that exist as such and in some cases do not have their source
wrong. Sanctions or remedial rights are those that come into being after the primary rights have
been violated. The purpose of the civil administration of justice is to ascertain the rights of the
parties and the party suffering from the infringement of such freedoms is to be assisted by paying
damages or receiving injunction, restitution and particular contract results etc6.

Objectives of Civil Justice

The objective of civil justice is to provide remedy for civil wrongs, it is administered by civil
courts. If successful, civil proceedings result in a decree for money, damages, or specific
performance, they may even grant restitution of property, injunction, restitution, etc. As Black

5
Mahajan, V.D., ‘Jurisprudence and Legal Theory’, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, Fifth Edition, 2017.
6
https://www.abyssinialaw.com/blog-posts/item/1477-law-as-a-means-of-serving-justice

8
Stone says, “the civil wrongs are an infringement or violation of the private or civil rights
belonging to individuals and recognized by law as civil injuries”. The right to be enforced in
civil proceedings is either a main right or a right to be sanctioned means one resulting from the
breach of another right. Primary law enforcement will be in the form of specific performance and
enforcement will be sanctioned for violation of the sanctioning right.

2. Administration of Criminal Justice:-

The purpose of criminal justice is to determine the crime of an individual accused of committing
an offence. After demonstrating that the offender is guilty of the charge, the criminal court
awards him the penalty of fine, imprisonment as prescribed by criminal law. Physical pain is
given to a convicted person. Thus, criminal justice's primary aim is to punish the wrongdoer.

Objectives of Criminal Justice:-

Criminal justice deals in its very nature with a situation where a mistake has already occurred
and it is established that the accused has violated the existing law for which he is to be punished.
Crime is a product of culture and a danger. There are several approaches to criminal justice
objectives. It is worthwhile to note Salmond's classifications of such objectives.

(i) Deterrent

(ii) Preventive

(iii) Reformative

(iv) Retributive

The aim of imposing penalty is to dissuade others from committing wrongs, and the main aim of
the law is to give the wrongdoer an instance and a warning to all who are like him7. As Locke
observes the commission of every offence should be made a bad bargain for the offender. In
view of Justice Holmes, there can be no case in which the law makes certain conduct criminal
without thereby showing a wish and purpose to prevent such conduct. The reformist strategy
thinks that although an offender commits a crime, he does not cease to be a human being and the
object of penalty should be to introduce the offender's moral reform. Retributive punishment
7
https://www.legalbites.in/administration-of-justice/

9
believes in enabling the wrongdoer to take revenge on the wrongdoer that is rooted in revenge
and has been very common in primitive society.

10
2. VARIOUS APPROACHES TO THE CONCEPT OF
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

 JUSTICE AND RELIGION

Regardless of their origin or philosophy, religions aim to differentiate between the virtues and
the vice and abhor their disciples to follow the virtuous path and ensure permanent well-being in
the form of "Swarga" or "Jannat" after death8.

Hinduism can be regarded as the most ancient religious philosophy with its vedic origin. A
reference to Hindu Scriptures and Scholars reiterates that one should follow the "Dharma" route
to attain "Moksha." Rig Veda says that the Law and Truth are born eternally from sacrifice and
sublimation.KAUTILYA in his Arthashstra has described Dharma as the basis for securing and
preserving power over the earth.

In the matter of good and evil, Islam believes in the concept of servitude doctrine. One can not
understand what good and evil are as ordinary mortal human beings unless a divinely inspired
prophet guides one in the matter. You have to do good and prevent evil. This is the Law of
Shariat which refers to totality of Allah’s commandments. Shariat governs all human activity.

Christianity describes law as a gift of divinity written in the hearts of all men, forcing them to do
things that are essential or consistent with the rational nature of humanity and to refrain from
things that are repugnant to it.

Buddhism places stress against worldly affairs on the pursuit of divine knowledge. Buddhism
teaches the fellow human beings fairness as a religion and follows the path of virtues. Justice and
respect for justice must come from within as a first choice and only when there is no need for
State intervention.

Jainism thinks in gaining awareness of others through the strength of one's own will without
inflicting violence. It firmly believes that "Ahinsa," the superior of all religions, can refer to a
person.

8
https://www.srdlawnotes.com/2018/02/administration-of-justice-jurisprudence.html

11
 JUSTICE AND SOCIETY

Law is a social phenomenon and human beings are interested in upholding law and justice in a
civilized society. In a civilized society, as per DEAN ROSCOE POUND9 “Men must be able to
assume that all citizens will be subject to rule of law, the law being far more than a bundle of
abstract norms. It is more a process of balancing of interest, by removing conflicts and for
rendering greatest benefit to the society with minimum of conflicts”. Dean Pound advocates the
concept of “Jural Postulates” as a guiding factor.

Law is therefore a means to an end, the end being the ultimate and lasting good of the greatest
number in society, while preserving the basic edifice of the urges and aspirations of the
individual. While the areas where society can expect "justice" to be done can not be defined
exhaustively, the most prominent of them can certainly be included., viz.

(i) General Security of individuals

(ii) Security of Social institutions like marriage

(iii) Security of morals of community by protection from dishonesty, corruption etc.

(iv) Preservation of Social resources.

(v) General progress and developments of its members.

All civilized societies have undergone drastic reforms over the past 3 to 4 centuries. New
equations have emerged with economic and industrial growth. The views of KARL MARX,
who advocated “classless society”, reflect the change. He advocated State control and
distribution of wealth because classless society was the solution of most of the problems.
However, the constraints of this idea have been disclosed by latest developments in Russia and
China. The legislation and idea of justice must keep pace with society's modifications. With
culture, the demands of society change, and any effective and useful legal system must be

9
DEAN ROSCOE POUND-JURISPRUDENCE

12
prepared to take into consideration such fresh demands in its growth10. In such cases, if law is
not flexible or unchangeable, the change will be imposed by violence and chaos, and thus, in a
constructive sense, the law can be a tool for peaceful change and revolution.

 JUSTICE AND CITIZENS

Citizens or, more broadly speaking, individuals are linked to justice and its orderly
administration. First of all, the very concept of justice and law inspires faith in people that the
State will handle, tackle or deal with certain situations, acts or omissions in a particular way. As
Dean ROSCOE POUND puts it "In a civilized society men must be able to assume that others
will make good reasonable expectations which their promises create”11

From the point of view of an individual, though a dominant, justice can not be a feasible or
desirable objective of law alone. While the law should be consistent on the one hand, it should
also have built-in flexibility. Any objective and fair system of judicial dispensation should be
governed by uniform laws so that citizens can plan their activities with certainty in anticipation
and predict the legal consequences of their behavior.

On the other hand as SALMOND 12 puts it "No rule can provide for every possible case”.
Therefore, flexibility is needed to allow the law to adapt to changes and to maintain some
element of discretion so that the very purpose of justice is not defeated while doing justice. In the
words of JOHN AUSTIN, enforcement of law from the point of view of individuals also takes
on importance. He said that- “the laws are commands of Sovereign, prescribing a code of
conduct and can be enforced by sanction of the State". Although Austin's imperative theory of
law can not be accepted in its entirety, there is an estoppel against the state from the point of
view of the individual from enacting post-facto laws that will deprive him of his property or
freedom. Nevertheless, at times such legislation were implemented and even maintained in their
speed to attain the broader social and national goals.

10
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=facultyworkingpap
ers
11
ROSCOE POUND, JURISPRUDENCE
12
SALMOND ON JURISPRUDENCE 12th EDITION.

13
The preamble to India's Constitution also expresses a solemn determination to secure justice,
social, economic and political for all its citizens. Here the term "Justice" is a guiding light for all
the executive actions of the State. With a population of nearly 90 crores, however, situations are
bound to emerge where an individual or group can face similar groups in order to achieve what
they both call "justice." The recent decision on “reservation for OBC” 13 sparked off lot of
controversy and caste wars and Supreme Court had to do the balancing act by striking down
some of the provisions of the Ordinance. As Prof. ALLEN C. CAMP puts it, “Social Justice has
no definite content and it means different things to different people”.

13
MANDAL COMMISSION REPORT

14
3. JURISPRUDENCE AND JUSTICE

Today, though vast and voluminous, the law and its system can be traced back to some
fundamental principles of law. There must be some basis for the law in any form. What is based
on wisdom is profound and lasting, what is based in justice will be respected for ages, what
bespeaks of truth will withstand all obstacles14. The things that are based on mere convenience or
that suit a certain class will create discontent and ultimate chaos.

The aim of justice as per ARISTOTLE is giving each man with his just due providing equality
of opportunity and equal treatment to equals.It also aims to punish criminal offenses or provide
restitution and remedies for civil misdemeanors. Jurisprudence thus acts as a linking nexus
between "natural justice" and "legal justice" implies what the state provides to its topics. Justice
governs the state itself, which is why it commands faith and respect from everyone15.

Thus the forms in which the law is administered or the forums in which such law is administered
may differ. There are some universal and well-recognized postulates that distinguish between
right and wrong, and the state is supposed to correct if it is incorrect. Such universal principles of
justice are found in the jurisprudence described as “Science and Philosophy of Laws and
Justice”. For this thesis, the analysis of these basic postulates is extremely useful because the
judicial system is often criticized as one that looks from, rather than substance, and is sometimes
counter-productive for the very purpose of justice.As Chief Justice COKE said “wisdom of law
is wiser than any man’s wisdom”. Rule of Law seems to be synonymous with the maintenance of
civilized existence16. While jurisprudence analyzes the causes and contributing factors as to how
the law evolves in its present form, justice aims to provide an aggrieved individual with what is
due or what it should do from the state's point of view when it violates the law enacted by it. As
law becomes a decision-making process in which men use institutions to shape, interpret and
enforce standards, it becomes apparent that many gaps in our knowledge have to be filled 17. For
the implementation of justice, applying the law in a specified scenario also includes an in-depth
knowledge of the real legal context from the point of perspective of jurisprudence.

14
Mahajan, V.D., ‘Jurisprudence and Legal Theory’, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, Fifth Edition, 2017
15
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/legal-theory/article/aristotle-on-equity-law-and-
justice/F634F78AF6283A599997FC4A47786AB6/core-reader
16
LAW AND CHANGING VALUES, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU’S SPEECH AT INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF JURISTS
17
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/30052127_Aristotle_on_equity_law_and_justice

15
LEOTOLSTOY observed “The seeds of every crime are in each of us”, which means to an
extent there is a need on part of every individual to make objective self-introspection before
blaming the system or others.

16
4. REALATIONSHIP OF LAWS WITH JUSTICE

The connection between law and justice, in particular the tension between official legal
procedures and ' rules of law ' and the accomplishment of significantly just results in individual
instances, is an important theory that has occupied the field of legal theory. Law is not
synonymous with justice. Justice is a basic value that oversees the law's scope and content. It
functions as a catalyst for enacting, amending or abolishing laws. The concept of justice is one of
jurisprudence's most prominent theoretical notions and is a regular feature in public life's
common disclosure. It is a concept that is readily understood,' injustice' in particular in the
context of its negation. Justice is a fundamental ethical concept that can be attributed in
situations involving awareness, rationality and moral sense. Law, on the other hand, is perceived
as a tool to achieve justice.

As per Prof. W. FRIEDMAN18 “The law must aspire at certainty, at justice, at progressiveness
but these objectives are constantly in conflict with one another. What the great judges and jurists
have taught is not infallible knowledge, or a certain answer to all legal problems but an
awareness of the problems of contemporary society and needs reforms accordingly”.

Justice Krishna Iyer 19 observes “The framers of our Constitution conceived of the Indian
Judiciary as an instrument of peaceful revolution. To fail short of that profound expectation is to
fail the Justice”.

Justice Beg20 observed: “Our Judges are the constitutionally authorized exponents of what may
be described as the “religion” of Secular State, summed up by the word “justice”.”

Therefore, on the one hand, they are called upon to be cautious and careful to express their
views. On the other side, they are much more in need of being conversant and concerned with
domestic welfare issues in all life departments than there was in the past. Law therefore acts as
the state's arm for achieving justice. The laws thus act as a vehicle to provide justice, not on

18
LAW IN A CHANGING SOCIETY BY PROF.W. FRIEDMAN.
19
INDIAN JUSTICE -PERSPECTIVES AND PROBLEMS, PAGE 15.
20
SPEECH IN ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT CENTANARY CELEBRATIONS BY JUSTICE BEG.

17
selective basis but as a duty. Article 38(1) of Constitution21 provide under directive principles of
State policy:-

“The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting an
effectively as it may, a social order in which justice, social, economical and political, shall
inform all the institutions of the national life.” Consequently, the judiciary and legislation have a
vibrant position to play as a catalyst for reform and development processes.

Rabindranath Tagore, also emphasized the pro-poor justice in following words:

“The weakness of the poor has so long kept the civilization weak and incomplete; they must set
this right by consequence of power ”

In its current context, while promoting the cause of justice, one can not ignore the involvement
of the pediments. Rajiv Gandhi in one of his speeches stated “Justice as it is accepted by the
people, is what really counts. A judge can rule on the law but it is really a rebel who tests the
law” 22 . The analysis of the views of the above mentioned great thinkers and leaders clearly
reveals that:

1. Law is not a static phenomenon that needs to alter over time.

2. Justice is the law's objective. Depending on the context, what is can differ.

3. In the first instance, justice seeks to bring reforms through the enactment of proper laws.

4. The justice is performed by hitting the equilibrium when the imbalance exists or the laws are
thwarted.

 THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN LAW AND JUSTICE

Since Plato's moment, legal and political theorists have confronted the question of whether
justice is component of the law or is merely a moral judgment on the law. There are no universal
principles that can define justice or injustice other than how the government has made its laws.

21
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, ARTICLE 38.
22
QUOTES OF RAJIV GANDHI-UBS PUBLICATION.

18
Justice is therefore different in different societies and under different authorities23. Others, on the
other hand, who do not like laws made by governments argue that there is some kind of universal
natural law or justice. But looking into our world's present practical legislation and
circumstances, each state has its own separate legislation that are supposed to serve justice.

Each government's law produced by the legislature (human created legislation) has its own social
context in politics, sociology, philosophy and history. In a given society, it is especially prepared
to solve and address problems and meet needs. Laws are also enacted in the strong party's
interest. Each sort of government enacts rules that are in its own interest, democratic laws,
tyranny tyrannical laws, and so on ; and in enacting these rules, they make it quite clear that what
is "correct" to their topics is what is in their own interests, the rulers, and if anyone deviates from
it, they are punished as lawbreakers and "wrongdoers."There are also times when law serves as a
manipulative device to force government leaders ' will on a society.

The mere fact that a government proclaims or enacts a law as a law doesn't mean it's just law.
And there are several laws that contradict natural law and justice. Apartheid law, for example, is
a law that is contrary to nature's law and entitles rights based on human color. It is entirely
contrary to the legislation of nature and justice. There are other laws that clearly contradict
natural law in addition to this. Since every law in a given culture has its own political,
sociological, philosophical and historical background, it will definitely benefit and harm
different groups in a society and can not serve justice evenly to all of society.

Implementing a law as it is written by representatives of government also has its own function in
bringing justice to bear. In order for liberty to thrive, individuals need to understand what the law
is and trust that authorities will apply the law faithfully as it is written. If you can be arrested by
a police officer because you have breached his feeling of justice somehow and if a judge can
convict you because she believes that what you have done was unjust, then you may be jailed for
innocent behaviour. Such a system would have no predictability.

Generally speaking, there are some cases where law and justice differ.

23
https://www.abyssinialaw.com/blog-posts/item/1477-law-as-a-means-of-serving-justice

19
5. IMPORTANCE OF JUSTICE

 JUSTICE AS INDISPENSABLE FUNCTION OF THE STATE:

State, law and justice are interconnected in today's context. Justice administration is the state's
indispensable function. The other necessarily comes into the picture when we refer to one. Thus,
the State functions and expresses its policy through law, the law is a tool to provide justice, and
the law is important because it has the state's sanction.But situations are not unusual where one
wing of the State says Executive initiates certain actions in the exercise of its powers that are not
in accordance with the laws. The role of the judiciary is to do the balancing act. Therefore, while
the state is superior and the creator of the law, some fundamental notions of justice are even
central to the state and need to be maintained and shielded. As per DUGHIT24 Social solidarity
is the aim of law and State. DICEY says by “rule of law” what we mean is law is supreme and
there is no arbitrary power in the State. Its fundamental law thus binds the State itself. The
constitution's "basic structure" is something the state has no authority to change through
legislative action. The notion of sovereignty is based on the principle that the State's authority
over its topics is absolute and that there can be no restrictions except on the issue of prudence
and policy.

Prof. Upendra Baxi differentiates between “Power of Justice” and “Justice of Power”.
According to him25.

“In the discourse of the law, justice is merely the aspect of power, Justice, according to the law is
that justice which people holding power of the State may consider it necessary or justified to
provide. The expectation is that when power defines justice it will enforce its definition."

Thus, the State itself has certain specific goals and goals, its own perceptions and notions of
where justice lies in a given situation and enforces it through its judicial body.

24
LAW AND STATE BY DUGHIT
25
KESHVANAND BHARTI V/s. STATE OF KERALA AIR 1973 SC 1461

20
 JUSTICE -A VITAL INGREDIENT OF FUNCTIONING OF STATE

(THE SYSTEMS APPROACH)

State is a system, a vibrant working system that includes all the countrymen. Different state
organs such as executive, parliament, and judiciary are state sub-systems and systems within
themselves. System’s notion is that it is a system of components that communicate or interrelate
in a more or less orderly and predictable way26. Judiciary and courts therefore comprise a system
of which the elements are judges, lawyers and litigants. The legal system also operates within the
State's limits. The judicial system's boundaries can be defined as the allocation of authority and
jurisdiction that the courts further define by reasonableness.The functioning system will require
inputs and produce output. The input is in the form of the litigation's demands, supports,
expectations. Again, the output in the form of decisions affects a bigger scheme including the
scheme itself. Since the systems are interconnected, all other components are affected by any
disruption, issues or imbalance with one component of the scheme. Consequently, the stresses
and strains on the judiciary also affect the state.

 NECESSITY OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

Salmond points out that there is no reason for men in them and that each is moved by their own
interests and passions. By nature, man is an animal that fights and force is the ultimate ratio of all
humanity. It is impossible for people to cohere in any but the most primitive type of culture
without a common authority to hold them all in fear. The element of force is always present and
operative, no matter how orderly a society may be. It is suggested that force is merely a
temporary and temporary incident in the development of a perfect civilization as an instrument
for the coercion of humanity. Public opinion's strength is a precious aid and even indispensable
to a scheme of law because there can be no stability and permanence without it. Public opinion
alone, however, does not replace legal sanctions27. A person is more concerned with his friends '
opinions and instant colleagues than with the views of the remainder of the globe. Social
sanction is an effective tool only when combined with and complemented by the community's
concentrated and irresistible strength. Force is needed to coerce the calcitrant minority and

26
https://lawaspect.com/the-relationship-between-law-and-justice/
27
Mahajan, V.D., ‘Jurisprudence and Legal Theory’, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, Fifth Edition, 2017

21
prevent them from gaining an unfair advantage over the majority-consistent law in a state. The
conclusion is that the administration of justice with the state's physical strength is unavoidable
and admits of no substitute.

22
6. LAW, JUSTICE AND EQUITY

"Equity" in its broad and philosophical sense means doing to all men as we would that they
should do to us. In its stricter sense, ft exposes and limits the language of positive laws and
interprets them in a more reasonable and benign spirit, not in accordance with their strict letters
and words. Equity is the correction of mere law where mere law fails because of its universality,
the correction of equity in order to achieve the goal of justice 28. Law and equity aim at the
common goal of promoting justice and preventing miscarriages of justice.

Laws are designed to obtain justice, but in the conditions of a specific situation, the
implementation of an otherwise just law may result in injustice. This is because laws are framed
in terms of general rules that can not provide for all possible variations in relevant circumstances
adequately in advance. In such cases, equity modifies the rigid application of the law to ensure
justice in the light of all the relevant circumstances. Thus, in the example of Aquinas, the law
may justly require the closure of the city gates after a certain hour, but officials may equitably
decree the opening of the gates during the legal closing hours to save fighters defending the city
being pursued by an enemy. In this sense, a fair decision is not separate from justice, but rather
ensures justice in the particular case by retroactively remedying the deficiencies of positive law
at the point of application29. The issue of the proper relationship between justice, equity and law
was explored both by a rich philosophical tradition that finds its classic statement in Aristotle's
writings and by the major legal traditions of the world.

 “EQUITY HELPS THOSE WHO COME WITH CLEAN HANDS”

Equity is the idea of justice, which for the sake of justice contravenes the written law. However,
thousands of litigation are filed to sabotage, circumvent and defeat the very purpose of the law
under the guise of seeking equity or equitable relief. The provisions for malicious prosecution,
perjury or compensatory costs are hardly providing any relief for this vicious phenomenon and
have weakened the very edifice of justice. Unfortunately, what is happening in the system today
is that there is a miscarriage of justice caused by the evidence, procedure and trial. Therefore, the

28
ARISTOTLE DISCUSSION ON MORAL EQUITY AND ETHICS
29
https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/justice-equity-and-law/v-1/sections/equity-between-law-
and-justice

23
need is that we should not investigate facts on the basis of arguments, but arguments on the basis
of facts. Because they are ignored, facts do not cease to exist. Therefore, the need for time is to
scrutinize whether the golden rule of "clean hand" is complied with at the very primitive stage of
litigation.

 DELAY DEFEATS EQUITY

The law expects the subject to be vigilant and prompt to enforce their rights or seek legal
remedies for the mistakes that they have suffered. There are many reasons for the same thing.
The courts can not be anticipated to wait for a litigant who is not diligent to do justice infinitely.
The evidence, evidence and other information may become outdated or loose context as well.The
maxim finds its position in the Limitations Act provisions30 which state that time does not stop
once it starts running. However, there are fair and fair exceptions aimed at protecting genuine
litigants from these provisions. The Limitations Act's provisions for condoning delay are the
same instance. However, delays, whether the litigant has made proceedings or the judge has
defeated equity and there can be no discriminatory treatment in the matter of delay between the
seekers of justice and the doers of justice. After all, human lives are for a limited period of time,
be it years or decades, and in the case where it deserves to be done promptly, a valuable litigant
right is denied for such time the justice is delayed. The justice is condemned when innocence is
scared. Such delay encourages injustice itself.

30
LIMITATION ACT, 1963 SECTION 3.

24
7. CONCLUSION

Administration of justice is one of a state's most important and indispensable functions. Justice is
a civilized society's attribute and characteristic. While living in society, situations involving
conflicts of interest between individuals and groups of individuals are bound to occur and
therefore the quest for justice has started right from the advent of human life and is bound to
continue as an endless process. "Justice" is the purpose of the law. As SALMOND31 puts it Law
is an instrument of society, what then does the law aim to achieve is justice. In other words, as
AUGUSTINE puts it “An unjust law is no law”.

The courts give justice to the people. Rendered justice must always comply with the law.
However, the courts are not always rendering justice. That's because judges aren't lawmakers,
they're just law interpreters. It is not the court's duty to correct the legal defects. The only
function of the judges is to administer the law as made by the legislature. The judges ' only
function is to administer the law as the legislature has done. Therefore, in the contemporary state,
the law-based administration of justice is frequently regarded as' implying acceptance of set
rules.' The law is nothing other than declaring and applying what is already just.

The law must aspire to be certain, to be fair, to be progressive, but these goals are in constant
conflict with each other. What the excellent magistrates and jurists have taught is not infallible
wisdom, or a certain response to all legal issues, but an understanding of modern society's issues
and the need for reforms. Law therefore functions as the state's tool for achieving justice. The
judiciary and laws have a dynamic role to play in reform and development processes as a
catalyst. Justice administration is the state's indispensable function. Thus, the State functions and
expresses its policy through law, the law is a tool to provide justice, and the law is important
because it has the state's sanction. And the judiciary’s function is to do the balancing act. A
sovereign state exercises its jurisdiction over the administration of justice through its judicial
body and it can not delegate the authority or abrogate the duty. Fairness is almost synonymous
with justice. The conclusion is that the administration of justice with the sanction of the state's

31
P.J. Fitzgerald, Jurisprudence By Salmond, 2016

25
physical power, i.e., law is inevitable and thus acknowledges that there is no replacement and
therefore the function of law in the administration of justice is important.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 BOOKS:-

1. Mahajan, V.D., ‘Jurisprudence and Legal Theory’, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow,
Fifth Edition, 2017.
2. P.J. Fitzgerald, Jurisprudence By Salmond, 2016.

 WEBSITES:-

1. https://www.srdlawnotes.com
2. https://www.academia.edu
3. https://www.legalbites.in
4. https://www.abyssinialaw.com
5. https://lawaspect.com
6. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu
7. https://www.cambridge.org
8. https://www.researchgate.net

26

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi