INDEX [doj.gov.in] · Question No. 2189 Unstarred 15.03.2017 All India Judicial Service National Mission 10. Question No. 2221 Unstarred 15.03.2017 Pending Cases of Accident ... Under

INDEX

S. No. Question No. Question Type

Date Subject Division

1. Question No. 938 Unstarred 08.02.2017 Special Courts Justice-II

2. Question No. 1031

Unstarred 08.02.2017 Evaluation of Standards for Judiciary

Desk Side

3. Question No. 1111 Unstarred 08.02.2017 Digitisation of Records eCourts

4. Question No.1124 Unstarred 08.02.2017 Pending Court Cases National Mission

5. Question No. 193 Starred 15.03.2017 Oath of Judges Desk Side

6. Question No. 196 Starred 15.03.2017

Hearing of cases via Video Conferencing

eCourt

7. Question No. 2114 Unstarred 15.03.2017 Establishment of New Benches Desk Side

8. Question No. 2174 Unstarred 15.03.2017 Extension of Parole

Admin Unit (II)

9. Question No. 2189 Unstarred 15.03.2017 All India Judicial Service

National Mission

10. Question No. 2221 Unstarred 15.03.2017 Pending Cases of Accident Insurance Claims

National Mission

11. Question No. *283 Starred 22.03.2017 Speedy Disposal of Cases National Mission

12. Question No. *286 Starred 22.03.2017 Infrastructure in Courts National Mission

13. Question No. 3230 Unstarred 22.03.2017 Division Bench of High Courts Desk Side

14. Question No. 3244 Unstarred 22.03.2017 Legal Service by NALSA Legal Aid to Poor

15. Question No. 3246 Unstarred 22.03.2017 Renaming of High Courts Desk Side

16. Question No. 3309 Unstarred 22.03.2017 Affordable Justice to Poor Legal Aid to Poor

17. Question No. 3364 Unstarred 22.03.2017 Appointment of SC/HC Judges Desk Side

18. Question No. 3373 Unstarred 22.03.2017 Judicial Reforms National Mission

19. Question No. 3379 Unstarred 22.03.2017 Video Recording of Proceedings eCourts

20. Question No. 384 Starred 29.03.2017 Fast Track Courts Justice-II

21. Question No. 4376 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Computerisation of Courts eCourts

22. Question No. 4389 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Jurisdiction on High Seas National Mission

23. Question No. 4390 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Details of Courts / Tribunals National Mission

24. Question No. 4397 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Divorce Cases Justice-II

25. Question No. 4433 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Hindi and other Regional Language in Courts

Justice-I

26. Question No. 4460 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Special Courts Justice-II

27. Question No. 4518 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Holidays in Judiciary Justice-I

28. Question No. 4570 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Subordinate Courts as FTCs Justice-II

29. Question No. 4585 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Plight of Under Trials LAP

30. Question No. 4596 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Increase in Judges in High Courts

Desk Side

31. Question No. 4598 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Vacancies in High Courts Desk Side

32. Question No. 4599 Unstarred 29.03.2017 Vacancies in Courts Justice-I

33. Question No. 5076 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Special Courts for Crime against Women

Justice-II

34. Question No. 5130 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Recommendation of Law Commission

National Mission

35. Question No. 5139 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Oldest Pending Case National Mission

36. Question No. 5197 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Judicial Academy in Andhra Pradesh

Justice-II

37. Question No. 5218 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Reservation for Women in Judiciary

Desk Side

38. Question No. 5219 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Free Legal Aid LAP

39. Question No. 5227 Unstarred 05.04.2017 TV Channel LAP

40. Question No. 5250 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Holiday in Courts Justice-I

41. Question No. 5251 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Quick Dispute Resolution National Mission

42. Question No. 5256 Unstarred 05.04.2017 Fast Track Courts Justice-II

43. Question No. *553 Starred 12.04.2017 All India Judicial Service National Mission

44. Question No. 6239 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Infrastructure in Consumer Courts

National Mission

45. Question No. 6251 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Separation of Executive and Legislature

Justice-I

46. Question No. 6256 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Fast Track Courts Justice-II

47. Question No. 6258 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Access to Justice Project LAP

48. Question No. 6273 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Regional Languages in Courts Justice-I

49. Question No. 6326 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Paperless Judiciary eCourts

50. Question No. 6337 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Efficient Work Culture National Mission

51. Question No. 6343 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Requirement of Session Courts National Mission

52. Question No. 6400 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Aid to Acid Attack Victims LAP

53. Question No. 6424 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Regional Benches of SC Desk Side

54. Question No. 6427 Unstarred 12.04.2017 Working of Courts during Vacation

Justice-I

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE

(DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)

LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 938

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY,2017

Special Courts

938. SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI:

Will the Minister of LAW & JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) the number of special courts created by various Statutes during the last three years

and the current year;

(b) the number of cases pending in the above said special courts;

(c) whether the Government has conducted a research to see if these special courts

have been able to dispose of the cases faster; and

( d) if so, the details thereof and the action taken in this regard?

(a)to (d):

ANSWER

MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI P.P. CHAUDHARY)

The creation of special courts, their functioning and any research on

disposal rate of cases by Special Courts fall under domain of the State Governments

which in consultation with the High Courts set up such Courts as per their requirement

from their own resources. The number of special courts created by various States during

the last three years including the current year and the number of cases pending in these

courts are not maintained centrally.

*****

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.1031

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 08.02.2017

Evaluation of Standards for Judiciary

1031. SHRI KESINENI NANI:

Will the Minister of LAW AND .JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether the Government has any plans to introduce performance evaluation standards for the judiciary and if so, the details thereof;

(b) whether this evaluation will be only for judges in lower courts or it will also include High Courts and the Supreme Court judges and if so, the details thereof;

(c) the wing of the Government that will be in charge of evaluating judges;

(d) whether this evaluation would affect judicial autonomy and if so, the steps taken by the Government in this regard; and

(e) whether the Government has studied any evaluation systems used by other countries and if so, the details thereof and the reaction of the Government thereto?

ANSWER

Minister of State for Law and Justice and Electronics and Information Technology

(SHRI P.P. CHAUDHA~Y) (a): No, Madam.

(b) to (e): Do not arise.

****

, •

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JU.STICE)

LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION No. 1111

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 8™ FEBRUARY, 2017

Digitisation of Records

1111. SHRI HARIOM SINGH RATHORE

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

a) whether the judicial proceedings/ decisions are available on the

website of courts;

b) if so, the details thereof;

c) whether the records and proceedings of the courts are being

digitised by the Government;

d) if so, the details thereof; and

e) the other initiatives taken by the Government for digitising the

records and proceedings of courts to bring more transparency

in their functions?

ANSWER MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW & JUSTICE AND

ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (Shri P.P.Chaudhary)

(a): Judicial proceedings/ decisions of district and subordinate courts for 17 ,259 computerised courts of the country as on 3n1 Feb, 2017 are available on the e-Courts portal (http://www.ecourts.gov.in). The portal provides online services to litigants such as details of case registration, cause list, case status, daily orders, and final judgments. Litigants can access case status information in respect of over 7 crore pending and decided cases pertaining to these courts.

(b): Statewise breakup is placed as Annexure.

(c) and (d): Under _the eCourts Mission Mode Project, more than 3 crore Orders/ Judgments of the computerised courts of the country

Page 1of3

• have been digitised and made available online by the Courts. In addition to the digitisation of records, digital technology is bein utilised for Video Conferencing (VC) facility in 493 court complexes and corresponding jails for production of accused for judicial remand purposes.

(e): Apart from eCourts Mission Mode Project initiatives, the other initiative taken by the Courts · is digitisation of legacy data pertaining to district and subordinate courts.

Page 2 of 3

\

-Annexure

Details of courts where the judicial proceedings/ decisions are

available on the website of courts as on 3rd Feb, 2017 as per the

National Judicial Data Grid (NJJ)G)

i State ' Number of Courts

i ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR !13

: ANDHRA PRADESH 527 i ASSAM l 293

- . -···--~------ ,,_._ .. , ···-·· -·'· -·---- ··-·--····-····--··•-..-·.--···--·''"" ·- ---·-·· ~-- ,., -·-•·"· ' .... "I

. 1397 ! BIHAR 1·-c"i:fANDIGARt~r------ . • •. -· ···-··------........ _.,_ - • "· . .,. ----------- - .• '"" ·- ... ,,. "'"'''"'""""' _______ " --- ----- ---- -----.. --- '""" ----·""l

50 CHHATTISGARH l·i5ELHT-·····--·---·----------- ..... --- --·· -- --- ·---·------

l :-----···---------------- .,_,,, ______ ., __________________________ ,,,.,,.,.,,.,, .... ----·-·· ---- -

i DIU AND DAMAN , DNH AT SILVASA ;--······ .. ········-···············-··· ............... --.-.... ·--·---·-·········---.. ·--··

:GOA

1218 L·------·--------------·· --------····-· .............. ,. __ -- ·--- ---- -- -. - . ·-··-···· ······-····--··-········· ··-··· - , .. -··------·· ··-··- ····-··········-·----------·-·· ·-I GUJARAT

iHARYANA 694 , HIMACHAL PRADESH

..... --·-·-·------'···-1·55····- - ···-···············--------·····-· ···- -.. -····-······:

I JAMMU AND KASHMIR ' 134

:JHARKHAND :545 '--- .. --------· ----··--·--·~-··--~ -- -· -·-----·-------· ·-- ........... _______ ... ., .. -- -· -· - -·-- . -· ... ----·· --··· ···-·····-··---· _ .. ______ --- . ·--·' ......... _ ... _ ...... -............ _. _____ .. __ ._ -· . -··-·-·-··-·--:

: KARNATAKA . 824 ;---~-------~---------------·--------------- ----··----1 KERALA

i 447 616

----~--------------·------··-- ·--·-------------I MADHYA PRADESH ;_MAHARASHTRA___________________________ 2546 1------------------·-------------·---·-------------·-·------------------··---······---·-------···-··-----------------·-··-l MANIPUR 23 -------------·------------------------· ------- -- -----·- ·------: MEGHALAYA ' 19 iMfzo"RANI_______________________________ ----,,·--1·--1-------------------------------------------·

: ORISSA·--------------------------- --------------- J 529 ________ ----:·PUN~J'A·B- - - ................... -- ---- - - ·;-7-30· - ................... -- -·-

:R.AJASTHAN [~X~~-'~--············------ ·············· --- --- ········-------- . I TAMIL NADU ·-rEIANGANA .. t-f RIPORA- --- --UTTAR PRADESH UTTARAKHAND

..................... ··+· ·-·---·-· .....

Page 3 of 3

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE



TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE oaTH FEBRUARY, 2017

Pending Court Cases

1124. DR. ANUPAM HAZRA: SHRI DUS HY ANT CHA UT ALA: SHRI RAYAPATI SAMBASIVA RAO: SHRI GOPAL SHETTY: SHRI RATTAN LAL KATARIA: SHRI CHANDU LAL SAHU: SHRIMATI REKHA VERMA: SHRI AJAY MISRA TENI: SHRI CHANDRA PRAKASH JOSHI: SHRI R. DHRUVA NARAYANA: SHRI S.P. MUDDAHANUME GOWDA: SHRI RAJU SHETTY: SHRI HARISH CHANDRA ALIAS HARISH DWIVEDI: SHRI NISHIKANT DUBEY: SHRI SHARAD TRIPATHI: SHRI HUKUM SINGH: SHRI RAJESH VERMA: SHRI OM BIRLA: SHRI M.B. RAJESH: SHRI RAHUL KASWAN: DR. MANOJ RAJORIA: SHRIMATI JAYSHREEBEN PATEL:


(a) the details of the civil and criminal cases pending at various levels in the judiciary, State and district-wise;

(b) the steps taken I being taken to address the high pendency of cases; (c) the details of the vacancies of judges at various levels in the judiciary; (d) the steps being taken to fill up these vacancies; and (e) the details of any other initiative taken by the Government to provide speedy

justice to the citizens?

ANSWER MINISTER OF ST ATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SHRI P. P. CHAUDHARY)

(a): The data on pendency of cases is maintained by Supreme Court and High Courts.

As per information made available by the Supreme Court of India 50,826 civil cases and

10,874 criminal cases were pending in Supreme Court of India as on 23.11.2016. The

details of pendency of civil and criminal cases in each of the High Courts and District I

Subordinate Courts as on 31.03.2016 are given in the Statements at Annexure - I and

Annexure - II respectively.

(b): Disposal of cases in courts is within the domain of judiciary. The Government has

adopted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased liquidation of arrears and

pendency in judicial systems, which, inter-alia, involves better infrastructure for courts

including computerisation, increase in strength of judicial officers I judges, policy and

legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation and emphasis on human

resource development.

(c): The sanctioned strength of judges in the Supreme Court is 31 and 8 posts of judges

are vacant as on 01.02.2017. The sanctioned strength of judges in the High Courts is

1079 in January, 2017. 433 posts of judges in the High Courts are vacant as on

01.02.2017 which includes 173 newly created posts. The details of present strength

and vacancy position of Judges in various High Courts are given at Annexure - Ill. The

Appointment of Judges and Judicial Officers in the District and Subordinate Courts falls

within the domain of the High Courts and State Governments concerned.

(d) : Filling up of the vacancies in the High Courts is a continuous process, as it requires

consultation and approval from various Constitutional Authorities. While every effort is

made to fill up the existing vacancies expeditiously, vacancies do keep on arising on

account of retirement, resignation or elevation of Judges and increase in Judge

strength. In view of the large number of vacancies and the fact that the process of

supplementing the existing Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for improvement in the

"Collegium System" as per Supreme Court Order dated 16.12.2015 was likely to take

some time, on the initiative of Government, the matter was taken up with the Supreme

Court and the process of appointment of judges has been resumed. During the year

2016, 126 fresh appointment of Judges in High Courts and 131 Additional Judges have

been made permanent, which is the highest number of appointments made in the last

2q years. In addition, the tenure of 22 Additional Judges of High Courts was also

extended. 4 Judges have also been appointed in Supreme Court in 2016. In 2017 (up

to 31.01.2017), 4 fresh appointments of Judges have also been made in High Court.

The subject matter relating to filling up of vacancies in the District and Subordinate

Courts falls within the domain of the High Courts and the State Governments

concerned. The Central Government has no role in appointment of Subordinate

Judiciary.

(e): The 14th Finance Commission has endorsed the proposal to strengthen the judicial

system in States which includes, inter-alia, establishing 1800 Fast Track Courts( FTCs)

for a period of five years for cases of heinous crimes; cases involving senior citizens,

women, children, disabled and litigants affected with HIV AIDS and other terminal

ailments; and civil disputes involving land acquisition and property/rent disputes pending

for more than five years at a cost of Rs.4, 144 crore. The 14th Finance Commission has

urged State Governments to use the additional fiscal space provided by the

Commission in the tax devolution to meet such requirements.

***********

I

Annexure-1

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 1124 FOR ANSWER ON osTH FEBRUARY, 2017.

Number of Civil and Criminal cases Pending in High Courts as on 31.03.2016

S. No. Name of the High Court Civil cases Criminal cases

1 Allahabad 554626 358412 2 Andhra Pradesh 234612 38359 3 Bombay 202893 47995 4 Calcutta 181385 39826

5 Delhi 46739 16350 6 Gujarat 51856 33175

7 Gauhati 22081 4932

8 Himachal Pradesh 26314 5603

9 Jammu &Kashmir 52860 4841

10 Karnataka 221857 20661

11 Kera la 122406 35604

12 Madras 255308 35515

13 Madhya Pradesh 175326 103176

14 Orissa 128940 40280

15 Patna 79334 49017

16 Punjab & Haryana 202058 83098

17 Rajasthan 184694 63797

18 1 Sikkim 83 45

19 Uttarakhand 19453 8268

20 Chhattisgarh 31773 19327

21 Jharkhand 42641 38853

22 Tripura 2342 505

23 Manipur 3123 126

24 Meghalaya 568 39 -

Total 2843272 1047804

Source: Court News, January - March, 2016, published by Supreme Court of India.

Annexure - II

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO LOK SABHA UNST ARRED QUESTION NO. 1124 FOR ANSWER ON oaTH FEBRUARY, 2017.

Number of Civil and Criminal cases Pending in District and Subordinate Courts as on 31.03.2016

S.No. Name of State/UTs Civil cases Criminal cases

1. Andhra Pradesh & Telangana 492248 536989 2. Arunachal Pradesh 1630 8014

3. Assam 68240 185401

4. Bihar 337642 1748622

5. Chhattisgarh 64562 215223

6. Goa 24403 16050

7. Gujarat 656336 1473180

8. Haryana 234223 296419

9. Himachal Pradesh 96683 122735

10. Jammu & Kashmir 47419 88676

11. Jharkhand 64997 263525

12. Karnataka 683139 607345

13. Kera la 429061 973475

14. Madhya Pradesh 272399 936261

15. Maharashtra 1097351 1997420

16. Manipur 3732 3406

17. Meghalaya 3359 10732

18. Mizoram 2232 2533

19. Nagaland 1883 2397

20. Orissa 267479 829248

21. Punjab 245443 268265 22. Rajasthan 479662 1036667

23. Sikkim 400 933

24. Tamil Nadu 649860 431916 25. Tripura 9762 145645

d6 Uttar Pradesh 1491145 4245179 7. Uttarakhand 31047 142392

I 28. West Bengal 566216 2089506 29. A & N Island 3286 5762

! 30. Chandioarh 15449 22330 31. Daman & Diu 963 753 32. D & N Haveli 1549 2399 33. Delhi 161181 411829 34. Lakshadweep 140 215 35. Pondicherry 13805 12550

Total 8518926 19133992 Source: Court News, January- March, 2016, published by Supreme Court of India.

Annexure-111

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 1124 FOR ANSWER ON oaTH FEBRUARY, 2017. Statement showing the Approved Strength, Working Strength and Vacancies of Judges in the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts.

(As on 01.02.2017)

SI. No. Name of the

Approved Strength Working Strength Vacancies as per

Court Aooroved Strength Supreme Court of 31 23 08 A. India

B. High Court Pmt. Addi Total Pmt. Addi Total Pmt. Addi Total 1 Allahabad 76 84 160 71 12 83 05 72 77

High Court of 46 15 61 27 0 27 19 15 34 Judicature at

2 Hyderabad 3 Bombay 71 23 94 56 06 62 15 17 32 4 Calcutta 54 18 72 37 01 38 17 17 34 -5 ChhattisQarh 17 05 22 08 03 11 09 02 11 6 Delhi 45 15 60 38 0 38 07 15 22 7 Gauhati 18 06 24 07 10 17 11 -04 07 8 Gujarat 39 13 52 25 06 31 14 07 21

Himachal 10 03 13 07 02 09 03 01 04 9 Pradesh

Jammu & 13 04 17 09 0 09 04 04 08 10 Kashmir 11 Jharkhand i 19 06 25 08 05 I 13 11 01 12 12 Karnataka 47 15 62 24 06 30 23 09 32 13 Kera la 35 12 47 25 12 37 10 0 10 14 Madhya Pradesh 40 13 53 18 19 37 22 -06 16 15 Madras 56 19 75 54 03 57 02 16 18 16 Manipur 04 01 05 03 0 03 01 01 02 17 Meghalaya 03 01 04 03 0 03 0 01 01 18 Orissa 20 07 27 15 03 18 05 04 09 19 Patna 40 13 53 24 06 30 16 07 23

Punjab & 64 21 85 45 02 47 19 19 38 20 Haryana 21 Rajasthan 38 12 50 23 11 34 15 01 16 22 Sikkim 03 0 03 02 0 02 01 0 01 23 Tripura 04 0 04 03 0 03 01 0 01 24 Uttarakhand 09 02 11 07 0 07 02 02 04

Total 771 308 1079 539 107 646 232 201 433* *Vacancies include 173 newly created posts of Judges from 01.07.2014 to 10.05.2016.

*******************

.. , GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE


LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION N0.193

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, the 15TH MARCH, 2017

Oath of Judges

+*193.SHRI AJAY MISRA TENI:

. Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state :

(a) whether the judges in Jammu and Kashmir do not take oath to uphold the Constitution of India and the judges of the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir are not bound to uphold the Constitution of India and if so, the details thereof;

(b) whether the provision of Article 368 of the Constitution has been added under the Constitutional order, 1954 wherein it has been provided that no such amendment shall have effect unless applied by order of the President under clause (1) of Article 370 and if so, the details thereof;

(c) whether there is a need to amend the Constitutional Order, 1954 in the present scenario; and

(d) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) to (d) : A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

Statement referred in reply to parts (a) to (d) of Lok Sabha Starred Question No.193 to be answered on 15.03.2017 regarding "Oath of Judges"

The Form of oath or affirmation which a judge of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir has to make and subscribe is given in the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir. The text of the said Form is reproduced below:

"/, A.B., having been appointed Chief Justice (or a Judge) of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir do swear in the name of God I Solemnly affirm that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the state as by law established, (that will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India,) that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge, and judgment perform the duty of my office without fear or favou0 affection or ill-will and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws."

The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954 was issued on 14 May 1954. Through this Constitution Order, following proviso has been added to Article 368 of the Constitution (Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor) in its application to the State of Jammu and Kashmir:

"Provided further that no such amendment shall have effect in relation to the State of Jammu and Kashmir unless applied by order of the President under clause (1) of article 370".

At present, there is no proposal for amendment in Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954.

***

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)

LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION No. 196

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 15THMARCH, 2017

Hearing of Cases via Video Conferencing

*196.SHRI SHARAD TRIPATHI


a) whether his Ministry has proposed compulsory hearing of high

profile cases via video conferencing in different prisons across

the country;

b) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor; and

c) the manner in which this initiative would help In speedy trial of

the aforesaid prisoners and provide time-bound and fair justice

to the victims and their families?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS

AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad)

(a) to (c): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

Page 1of2

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (c) OF LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. 196 FOR 15TH MARCH, 2017 REGARDING HEARING OF CASES VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING

(a) to (c): The eCourts Mission Mode Project of the Government of India encompasses provisioning of video

conferencing facility between courts and jails. Under Phase-I of the project, nearly 500 court complexes and 342 corresponding prisons have been covered under the scheme. In addition, 429 court complexes have been covered from other sources.

Decision on processes of video conferencing lies within the domain of the Judiciary and any decision is taken in consultation with it.

Page 2 of 2


DEPARTMENT OF JUS11CE



Establishment of New Benches

2114. DR. RATNA DE (NAG): SIIRf MANOJTIWARI: SIIRI DHAR.AMBIR:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to stale:

(a) whether the Government plans to establish new benches of various High Courts across the country including Kolkata, Allahabad and Chandigarh;

(b) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor; and

( c) whether this initiative will help to provide time-bound justice to the citizens of the country and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(SHRJ P.P. CHAUDHARY)

(a) to (c) : In accordance with the recommendations made by the Jaswant Singh

Commission and judgment pronounced by the Apex Court in W.P.(C) No.379 of

2000, Bench( es) of the High Court are established after due consideration of a

complete proposal from the State Government, which is to provide infrastructure and

meet the expenditure, along with the consent of the Chief Justice of the concerned

High Court, which is required to look after the day to day administration of the High

Court and its Bench. The proposal should also have the consent of the Governor of the

concerned State.

. .. 2/-

-2-

Establishment of Bench(cs) of High Courts is one of the several factors for

providing time bound justice to citizens. Requests for establishment of High Court

Benches in different parts of the country have been received from various sources

including some State Governments. However, at present there is no proposal complete

in all aspects pending for consideration by the Central Government including the High

Courts of Calcutta, Allahabad and Punjab & Haryana.

*****

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)

LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.2174

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 15th MARCH, 2017

Extension of Parole

+2174. SHRIMATI RAMA DEVI: SHRI CHANDRAKANT KHAIRE:


(a) whether many industrialists and directors of companies

serving jail terms for fraud done in their companies are granted parole/extended parole;

(b) if so, the names of such industrialists and the directors with names of their companies;

(c) the reasons put forward before courts to reject parole/extension of paroles to such persons serving Jail terms;

(d) the reaction of the Government to granting

parole/extension of parole despite putting forward the

above reasons; and (e) the corrective measures taken by the Government in this

regard?

ANSWER


(SHRI P.P.CHAUDHARY)

(a)to (e): The information is being collected and the same

will be laid on the Table of the House.



LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 2189

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, 15th MARCH, 2017

All India Judicial Service

2189. DR. BHAGIRATH PRASAD: SHRI KONDA VISHWESHWAR REDDY: DR. BOORA NARSAIAH GOUD: SHRIMATI VANAROJA R:


(a) whether the Government has revived the proposal to constitute an All India Judicial Services (AIJS) for appointment of district judges through a rigorous examination process to be conducted by the Union Public Service Commission and if so, the details thereof;

(b) whether there are at least 4400 vacancies of judges in the subordinate judiciary and if so, the reasons therefor ;

(c) whether it is true that the proposal to set up an AIJS has been pending since 1960 and if so, the reasons therefor;

(d) whether it is also true that the Government has held discussion with all concerned parties/ stakeholders in this regard; and

(e) if so, the details thereof and the outcome thereof?

ANSWER


(SHRI P. P. CHAUDHARY)

(a) to (e): The creation of All India Judicial Service was recommended by Law

Commission of India in its 14th Report (1958). Later; Law Commission reiterated such

recommendation ih 77th Report (1978) and 116th Report (1986) . The Supreme Court

of India in the matter of All India Judges Association versus Union of India and others,

recommended that Government should examine the feasibility of implementing the

recommendations of the Law Commission for setting up of All India Judicial Service.

The issue of creation of All India Judicial Service was considered and recommended by

the First National Judicial Pay Commission (FNJPC) better known as Justice Shetty

Commission.

A comprehensive proposal was formulated for the constitution of an All India

Judicial Service (AIJS) and the same was approved by the Committee of Secretaries in

November, 2012. The proposal was included as an agenda item in the Conference of

Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of the High Courts held in April , 2013 and it was

decided that issue needs further deliberation and consideration. The views of the State

Governments and High Courts were sought on the proposal. There was divergence of

opinion among the State Governments and among the High Courts on the constitution

of All India Judicial Service. While some State Governments and High Courts were not

in favour of creation of All India Judicial Service, some other State Governments and

High Courts wanted changes in the proposal formulated by the Central Government.The

proposal for constitution of All India Judicial Service with views from the High Courts

and State Governments received thereon was included in the agenda for the Joint

Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of the High Courts held on 051h April,

2015. However, no progress was made on the subject. The matter regarding creation

of a Judicial Service Commission to help the recruitment to the post of district judges

and review of selection process of judges I judicial officers at all level was also included

in the agenda for the Chief Justices Conference, which was held on 03rd and 041h April,

2015, wherein it was resolved to leave it open to the respective High Courts to evolve

appropriate methods within the existing system to fill up the vacancies for appointment

of District judges expeditiously.

Keeping in view the divergence of opmton among the stakeholders on

constitution of All India Judicial Service, the Government has undertaken the

consultative process to arrive at a common ground.

The filling of vacancies of Judges I Judicial officers in Districts and Subordinate

Courts is within the domain of the State Governments and the High Courts concerned.

However, as per the Court News (July-September, 2016) of Supreme Court, 4846 posts

of Judges/ Judicial Officers were vacant in the District and Subordinate Courts as on

30.9.2016.

*******



LOK SABHA

UNST ARRED QUESTION NO. 2221


Pending Cases of Accident Insurance Claims

+ 2221. SHRI YOGI ADITY A NATH


(a) the details of the pending cases of accident insurance in the country; (b) whether the Government is considering to set up special district courts for the

disposal of the said cases; (c) if so, the details thereof; and (d) the steps taken by the Government for the disposal of the said pending

cases?

ANSWER



(a) to (d) : Data on pendency of cases is compiled by the High Courts and the Supreme

Court. Information on pendency of civil and criminal cases is being obtained at

periodical intervals from the High Courts. As per information furnished by the High

Courts, 3, 13, 728 cases related to Motor Accident Claims were pending in various High

Courts and 9,79,539 cases were pending in District and Subordinate Courts as on

31 .12.2015 .

Section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, inter-alia, provides that State

Government may, by notification, constitute one · or more Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunals for such area as may be specified in the notification for the purpose of

adjudicating claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving death or bodily

injury to persons arising out of use of motor vehicles , or damages to any property of a

third party so arising , or both. Hence, Central Government has no role in setting up

such courts. As per information available 630 Special District Courts!Tribunals are

functioning in the country to deal with Motor Accident claim cases.

Disposal of cases pending in courts is within the domain of judiciary. The

Government has adopted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased

liquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial systems, which, inter-alia, involves better

court infrastructure including computerisation, increase in the strength of subordinate

judiciary and initiating policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive

litigation and emphasis on human resource development.

****************

•

:

,, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE


LOK SABHA

STARRED QUESTION NO. *283

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, 22N°MARCH, 2017

Speedy Disposal of Cases

*283. DR SANJAY JAISWAL: SHRI MOHD. SALIM:


(a) the details of the average disposal of cases by a High Court Judge in a day; (b) whether on an average, 57 to 80 percent cases have taken 10 to15 years to be

disposed of in High Courts; (c) if so, the reasons for such inordinate delay and the system put in place for timely

disposal of cases; (d) whether the Government has taken any concrete action plan to improve the

disposal of the cases and efficacy of the system; and (e) if so, the details thereof along with the success achieved as a result thereof so far?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI RA VI SHAN KAR PRASAD)

(a) to (e): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERREP TC lN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (e) of LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. *283 FOR ANSWER ON 22No MARCH, 2017.

(a) to (e): The average time taken for disposal of cases depends on several factors such as

• category of the case such as civil or criminal, complexity of the circumstances and facts

involved, nature and availability of evidences, co-operation of various stake-holders viz. bar,

investigation agencies, witnesses and litigants besides the availability of physical

infrastructure, supporting court staff and applicable rules and procedures. Hence, average

disposal of cases differs from case to case and from High Court to High Court. It may not be

practicable to compare the time taken for disposal of cases by various High Courts in the

country due to involvement of several factors. The courts operate in different environment on

account of difference in availability of infrastructure facilities, use of technology, number of

availability of Judges, docket ratio, provisions of substantive laws and procedures in courts.

The Government does not maintain data on average disposal of cases per judge and

_ the average time taken for disposal. However, as per Court News, Supreme Court during the

period of the year from 01st October, 2015 to 30th September, 2016, 15.86 lakh cases were

disposed by the High Court having working strength of 597 Judges as on 30.09.2016, which

works out as average disposal of 2,657 cases by a High Court Judge during this period.

Disposal of cases pending in courts is within the domain of Judiciary. The

Government has adopted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased liquidation of

arrears and pendency in judicial systems, which, inter-a/ia , involves better infrastructure for

courts including computerisation, increase in strength of judicial officers I judges, policy and

legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation and emphasis on human

resource development.

During the Joint Conference of Chief Ministers of States and Chief Justices of the High

Courts held at New Delhi in April 2015, reduction of pendency and backlog of cases in courts

emerged as an area which required focused attention at the High Court level. The Chief

Justices of the High Courts in the Conference held on 03ro and 04th April 2015 have resolved

that each High Court shall establish an Arrears Committee, which would go into the factors

responsible for the delays and prepare an action plan to clear the backlog of cases pending

for more than five years. It was further resolved in the Conference of Chief Justices of the

High Courts held in April, 2016, that in order to ensure expeditious disposal of cases

pertaining to women, marginalized segments, senior citizens and differently-abled, steps be

taken to (a) prioritize the disposal of cases falling in these categories within the existing court

system; (b) an endeavour be made to revisit the cadre strength · ! SU.JOrdinate courts and,

where necessary, create additional courts to deal with such cases. As per information

available, Arrears Committees have been set up by the High Courts.

In addition, following steps have also been taken by the Government in the matter.

(i) The sanctioned strength of Judges of High Courts has been increased from 906

judges in June 2014 to 1079 judges in May, 2016.

(ii) The sanctioned strength of the subordinate judiciary has been increased from 20, 17 4

at the end of 2014 to 21,374 in September, 2016.

(iii) The filling of vacancies of Judges I Judicial officers in Districts and Subordinate Courts

is within the domain of the State Governments and the High Courts concerned.

However, Government takes up the matter with the High Courts from time to time to fill

up the vacancies of Judges I Judicial Officers of District and Subordinate Courts.

(iv) In May 2015, a communication was addressed to the Chief Justices of High Courts

requesting them to apprise the action being taken to make the recruitment process

more broad based to fill up the existing vacancies of judicial officers I judges at all

levels in the District and Subordinate Courts to enable the Government to take a view

on the need for formation of All India Judicial Service. Most of the High Courts have

indicated that the recruitment process which is in their domain for vacancies in

subordinate judiciary at all levels has been expedited in terms of the resolution passed

in the Conference of Chief Justices held in New Delhi in April 2015. The selections for

the various posts in subordinate judiciary are being conducted by State Governments I

High Courts in consonance with the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malik

Mazhar Sultan case Vs UP Public Service Commission.

(v) All State Governments have notified the State Litigation Policies so as to reduce

Government Litigations. National Litigation Policy is on the anvil.

(vi) Promotion of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism is a key strategy for

reducing delays and pendency in courts.

(vii) National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is a key tool for access to justice for poor

people in India, under the overall supervision of the Chief Justice of India as the

Patron-in Chief. It organised the National Lok Adalat in February, 2017. 6.39 lakh

pending cases and 2.95 cases at the pre-litigation stage were disposed.

(viii) 1175 obsolete laws have been repealed.

(ix) Recently, the Government has launched a nation-wide drive to reduce the number of

cases pending in courts by curtaining the Government litigations. The Government

has written to all Ministers of Central Ministries and Chief Ministers of States to launch

'special arrears clec:;ance drives' to reduce pending cases and minimize fresh

litigations.

(x) Based on the proposals received from the High Court Collegium, during the year 2016,

126 fresh appointment of Judges in High Courts and 131 Additional Judges were

made permanent, which is the highest number of appointments made in the last 26

years. In addition, the tenure of 22 Additional Judges of High Courts was also

extended. Besides, based on the proposal received from the Supreme Court

Collegium, 4 judges were appointed in the Supreme Court in 2016. During the current

year (2017), as on date, 5 more Judges has been appointed in Supreme Court, 9 more

Judges have been appointed in High Courts and 16 more Additional Judges have

been made permanent.

(xi) The 14th Finance Commission has endorsed the proposal to strengthen the judicial

system in States which includes, inter-alia, establishing 1800 FTCs for a period of five

years for cases of heinous crimes; cases involving senior citizens, women, children,

disabled and litigants affected with HIV AIDS and other terminal ailments; and civil

disputes involving land acquisition and property I rent disputes pending for more than

five years at a cost of Rs. 4144 crore. The 14th Finance Commission has urged State

Governments to use the additional fiscal space provided by the Commission in the tax

devolution to meet such requirements. The Hon'ble Prime Minister had written to all

Chief Ministers on 23rd April, 2015 followed by reminders from the Hon'ble Minister of

Law & Justice to make available the fund recommended by the 14th Finance

Commission to judiciary from the additional fiscal space available under the 14th

Finance Commission.

(xii) As per the resolution adopted in the Joint Conference held in New Delhi on 24th April,

2016, The Government vide its letter dated 261h September, 2016 requested the State

Governments to strengthen the institutional mechanism between the State and the

Judiciary where the Chief Secretary and his team and 2 or 3 Judges of the High Court

to regularly meet and monitor utilisation of plan fund and timely completion of

infrastructure and eCourts Mission Mode project. The States have ·also been

requested to assist Judiciary in preparing perspective I annual plan for various

activities to be undertaken in the justice sector on account of enhanced devolution of

funds to the States under the 14th Finance Commission. In addition, the States were

requested to provide technical manpower for ICT upgradation.

(xiii) The Government vide a letter dated 3 Feb 2017, addressed the Chief Justices of the

24 High Courts, raising concerns regarding the increased number of undertrials in jails

across the country. The Government, in underscoring the importance of fair trial for

every accused, requested the High Court to advise the district judiciary to ensure

effective implementation of Section 436A Code of Crimina: Procedure and ensure

periodic monitoring of the associated Undertrial Review Committee mechanism. So

far, two High Courts - Punjab and Haryana High Court and Madhya Pradesh High

Court - have responded to this letter who have assured action on this front.

(xiv) As per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Order dated 02.01 .2017 in the

matter of lmtiyaz Ahmed Case, the Department of Justice has forwarded a copy of

interim report of the NCMS (National Court Management System) Committee to all

State Governments and High Courts to enable them to take follow up action to

determine the required Judges Strength of district judiciary based on the NCMS report.

(xv) Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High

Court Act, 2015 has been notified on 1st January, 2016 to have a streamlined

procedure for the conduct of cases in the Commercial Division and in the Commercial

Court by amending the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for commercial cases so

as to improve the efficiency and reduce delays in disposal of commercial cases.

(xvi) Necessary amendments have been made to Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to

make the award within 12 months, to resolve the dispute through fast rack procedure,

to ensure Neutrality of arbitrators, and to restrict the term 'Public Policy of India' (as a

ground for challenging the award)

(xvii) The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act 2015 has been notified to clarify the

jurisdiction where dishonour of cheque cases may be filed and provide for transfer of

cases to the appropriate jurisdiction and consolidation of multiple cases filed in

different courts.

************

I 'JVERNMENT OF INDIA l'l.!NISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE


LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, 22N°MARCH, 2017

Infrastructure in Courts

*286. SHRI MD. BADARUDDOZA KHAN:


(a) the status of development of infrastructure facilities and computerisation in the courts;

(b) whether the Government is aware of shortage of Court Rooms and other infrastructure in the Courts across the country resulting in tardy disposal of cases in such courts and if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor;

(c) the sanctioned strength of Judges in the Courts including Subordinate Courts and the number of posts lying vacant at present, Court-wise along with the reasons therefor; and

(d) the corrective steps being taken by the Government to fill up the vacant posts and provide adequate infrastructure in the Courts at the earllest?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION . TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI RA VI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) to (d): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN ~EPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (d) of LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. *286 FOR A1\jSWER ON 22NO MARCH, 2017.

(a) to (d) : The development of infrastructure facilities for judiciary is the primary responsibility

of the State Governments. However, in order to augment the resources of the State

Governments, a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for development of infrastructure

facilities for judiciary has been in operation since 1993-94. Financial assistance to the tune

of Rs. 5,479 crore has been provided to the States and Union Territories since inception of

the Scheme, out of which an amount of Rs. 2,034 crore has been sanctioned since May,

2014. The Government is also implementing eCourts Mission Mode project which broadly

covers computerisation of district and subordinate courts.

As per information received from the High Courts and the State Governments, 16,513

court halls were available for Subordinate Judiciary as on 31.12.2015 against the working

strength of 16,528 judicial officers as on 30.09.2016. Further, 2,447 court halls were under

construction. In addition, 14,420 Residential Units were available for Judges I Judicial

Officers of District and Subordinate Courts and 1,868 under construction as on 31 .12.2015.

The national e-Courts portal (http://www.ecourts.gov.in) has been made operational. It

provides online services such as case registration, cause lists, case status, daily orders and

final judgements. As per the information available on the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG),

there are 19,982 computerised courts in the country as on 17th March, 2017. Phase II of the

eCourts MMP is approved on 161h July, 2015 for the duration of four years or until the project

is completed, whichever is later, at the cost of Rs.1,670 crore.

The filling of vacancies of Judges I Judicial officers in Districts and Subordinate Courts

is within the domain of the State Governments and the High Courts concerned. However, as

per the Court News (July-September, 2016) of Supreme Court, the details of sanctioned and

working strength and vacancies of Judges I Judicial Officers in District and Subordinate

Courts as on 30.09.2016 are given in the Statement Annexed.

The Government has ad~pted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased


infrastructure for courts including computerisation, increase in strength of judicial officers I

judges, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation and

· emphasis on human resource development.

In addition, following steps have also been taken by the Government in the matter.

(i) The sanctioned strength of Judges of High Courts has been increased from 906 . judges in June 2014 to 1079 judges in May, 2016.

(ii) The sanctioned strength of the subordinate judiciary has been increased from 20, 17 4

at the end of 2014 to 21 ,374 in September, 2016.

(iii) The filling of vacancies of Judges I Judicial officers in Districts and Subordinate Courts

is within the domain of the State Governments and the High Courts concerned.

However, Government takes up the matter with the High Courts from time to time to fill


(iv) In May 2015, a communication was addressed to the Chief Justices of High Courts

requesting them to apprise the action being taken to make the recruitment process

more broad based to fill up the existing vacancies of judicial officers I judges at all

levels in the District and Subordinate Courts to enable the Government to take a view

on the need for formation of All India Judicial Service. Most of the High Courts have

indicated that the recruitment process which is in their domain for vacancies in

subordinate judiciary at all levels has been expedited in terms of the resolution passed

in the Conference of Chief Justices held in New Delhi in April 2015. The selections for

the various posts in subordinate judiciary are being conducted by State Governments I

High Courts in consonance with the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malik

Mazhar Sultan case Vs UP Public Service Commission.



(vi) Promotion of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism is a key strategy for

reducing delays and pendency in courts.

(vii) National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is a key tool for access to justice for poor

people in India, under the overall supervision of the Chief Justice of India as the

Patron-in Chief. It organised the National Lok Adalat in February, 2017. 6.39 lakh

pending cases and 2.95 cases at the pre-litigation stage were disposed.


(ix) Recently, the Government has launched a nation-wide drive to reduce the number of

cases pending in courts by curtaining the Government litigations. The Government

has written to all Ministers of Central Ministries and Chief Ministers of States to launch

'special arrears clearance drives' to reduce pending cases and minimize fresh

litigations.

(x) Based on the proposals received from the High Court Collegium, during the year 2016,

126 fresh appointment of Judges in High Courts and 131 Additional Judges were

made permanent, which is the highest number of appointments made in the last 26

years. In addition, the tenure of 22 Additional Judges of High Courts was also

ext~nded . Besides, based on the proposal received from the Supreme Court

Collegium, 4 judges were appointed in the Supreme Court in 2016. During the current

year (2017), as on date, 5 more Judges has been appointed in Supreme Court, 9 more

Judges have been appointed in High Courts and 16 more Additional Judges have

been made permanent.

(xi) The 14th Finance Commission has endorsed the proposal to strengthen the judicial

system in States which includes, inter-alia, establishing 1800 FTCs for a period of five

years for cases of heinous crimes; cases involving senior citizens, women, children,

disabled and litigants affected with HIV AIDS and other terminal ailments; and civil

disputes involving land acquisition and property I rent disputes pending for more than

five years at a cost of Rs. 4144 crore. The 14th Finance Commission has urged State

Governments to use the additional fiscal space provided by the Commission in the tax

devolution to meet such requirements. The Hon'ble Prime Minister had written to all

Chief Ministers on 23rd April, 2015 followed by reminders from the Hon'ble Minister of

Law & Justice to make available the fund recommended by the 14th Finance

Commission to judiciary from the additional fiscal space available under the 14th

Finance Commission.

(xii) As per the resolution adopted in the Joint Conference held in New Delhi on 24th April,

2016, The Government vide its letter dated 25th September, 2016 requested the State

Governments to strengthen the institutional mechanism between the State and the

Judiciary where the Chief Secretary and his team and 2 or 3 Judges of the High Court

to regularly meet and monitor utilisation of plan fund and timely completion of

infrastructure and eCourts Mission Mode project. The States have also been

requested to assist Judiciary in preparing perspective I annual plan for various

activities to be undertaken in the justice sector on account of enhanced devolution of

funds to the States under the 14th Finance Commission. In addition, the States were

requested to provide technical manpower for ICT upgradation.

(xiii) The Government vide a letter dated 3 Feb 2017, addressed the Chief Justices of the

24 High Courts, raising concerns regarding the increased number of undertrials in jails

across the country. The Government, in underscoring the importance of fair trial for

every accused, requested the High Court to advise the district judiciary to ensure

effective implementation of Section 436A Code of Criminal Procedure and ensure

periodic monitoring of the associated Undertrial Review Committee mechanism. So

far, two High Courts - Punjab and Haryana High Court and Madhya Pradesh High

Court - have responded to this letter who have assured action on this front.

(xiv) As per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its o, der ddted 02.01 .2017 in the

matter of lmtiyaz Ahmed Case, the Department of Justice has forwarded a copy of

interim report of the NCMS (National Court Management System) Committee to all

State Governments and High Courts to enable them to take follow up action to

determine the required Judges Strength of district judiciary based on the NCMS report.

(xv) Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High

Court Act, 2015 has been notified on 151 January, 2016 to have a streamlined

procedure for the conduct of cases in the Commercial Division and in the Commercial

Court by amending the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for commercial cases so

as to improve the efficiency and reduce delays in disposal of commercial cases.

(xvi) Necessary amendments have been made to Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to

make the award within 12 months, to resolve the dispute through fast rack procedure,

to ensure Neutrality of arbitrators, and to restrict the term 'Public Policy of India' (as a

ground for challenging the award)

(xvii) The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act 2015 has been notified to clarify the

jurisdiction where dishonour of cheque cases may be filed and provide for transfer of

cases to the appropriate jurisdiction and consolidation of multiple cases filed in

different courts.

************

************

Annexure

Statement referred to Lok Sabha Starred Question No.*286 for reply on 22.03.2017 regarding infrastructure in courts

Sanctioned Strength, working strength and vacancies of judges in the various S b d" t C rt I th t 30 09 2016 u or ma e OU n e coun :n 1 as on

Sr. Name of the State I Total Sanctioned Total Working Vacancy No. UT Strength Strength 1. Uttar Pradesh 2,262 1,674 588 2. Andhra Pradesh & 975 798 177

Telangana 3(a) Mahrashtra 2,257 2,248 9 3(b) Goa 57 46 11 3(c) Diu and Daman 7 6 1 3(d) Silvasa 4(a) West Bengal 1,013 885 128 4(b) Andaman & Nicobar 5. Chhattisaarh 395 334 61 6. Delhi 793 491 302 7. Gujarat 1,953 1,133 820

8(a) Assam 424 314 110 8(b) Nagai and 34 25 9 8(c) Mizoram 63 30 33 8(d) Arunachal Pradesh 26 17 9 9. Himachal Pradesh 155 145 10 10. Jammu & Kashmir 246 219 27 11. Jharkhand 671 454 217 12. Karnataka 1,299 923 376

13(a) Kera la 470 415 55 13(b) Lakshadweep 3 3 0 14. Madhya Pradesh 1,461 1,233 228 15. Manipur 41 34 7 16. Meghalaya 57 41 16

17(a) Tamil Nadu 1,038 948 90 17(b) Puducherry 26 14 12 18. Orissa 863 606 257 19. Bihar 1,825 1,016 809

20(a) Punjab 674 548 126 20(b) Haryana 644 505 139 20(c) Chandigarh 30 30 0 21 . Raiasthan 1,203 1,081 122 22. Sikkim 18 14 4 23. Tripura 106 78 28 24. Uttarakhand 285 220 65

Total 21,374 16,528 4,846* **********

*Vacancies in Subordinate Courts are to be filled up by the concerned High Courts I State Government.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE




Division Bench of High Courts

t3230. SHRI ARJUN LAL MEENA: SHRIMA Tl JA YSHREEBEN PA TEL:


(a) the number of division benches working in various High Courts in the country;

(b) the names of the States from which demand for division benches is lying pending,

State-wise details thereof and the action taken by the Government thereon;

(c) the name of High Courts where hearing is done in the regional language; and

(d) whether the Government proposes to initiate hearing process in the courts in regional

languages and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER

Minister of State for Law and Justice and Electronics and Information Technology.


(a) & (b): Setting up of division benches in the High Courts are within the administrative control

of the Chief Justices of the High Courts. The Government has no control over the administrative

functioning of the High Court. As such, no information is maintained by the Central Government

in this regard.

(c) : Use of regional languages has, so far, not been allowed in the hearings of the High Courts.

However, use of Hindi has been authorized in the proceedings in the High Courts of the States of

-Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

(d): Based on requests from the State Government of Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Karnataka and

Chhattisgarh the Government sought the advice of the Chief Justice of India as per a decision of

Cabinet taken in 1965. However, Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India vide his d.o. letter dated

18.01.2016 has conveyed that the Full Court, after extensive deliberations disapproved the

proposals and reiterated the Resolution which was adopted on 07.05.1997, on 15.10.1999 and on

11.10.2012.

* * *


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ******

LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNSDA Y, THE 22°d MARCH, 2017

Legal Service by NALSA

3244. SHRI GEORGE BAKER:


(a) the number of Village Legal Services Clinics set up so far by the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) in the country, State/UT-wise;

(b) the details of the funds sanctioned, allocated and utilised for this during the last three years and the current year, State-wise;

( c )the details of the targets fixed and achievements made under this programmes so far;

( d) whether the Government is satisfied with the achievements and if not, the reasons therefore and the action taken by the Government in this regard;

( e) the details of the facilities/information provided by these Clinics and the details of the response received by the Government in this regard; and

(f) whether the Government is planning to open some more Village Legal Services Clinics with modern facilities across the country and if so, the details thereof and the time by which it is likely to be set up?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF ST A TE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY


(a)to(c)No specific target has been fixed for setting up of Village Legal Care & Support Centres all over the country. Statements showing State-wise details of such centres as on 31-01 -2017 and funds allocated for

•' -2-

all legal aid schemes including these centres during the period are given at Annexure-A and Annexure-B respectively.

( d)to( e) In the last two decades since the National Legal Services Authority has been set up, it has succeeded in creating legal awareness I literacy as well as legal aid programmes for the marginalized people at the grass-root level. The Legal Services Authorities at various levels are providing basic, inexpensive legal services like legal advice, drafting of petitions, notices, replies, applications etc.

(f) Setting up of such centres in the country depends upon available financial resources and where there is justification.

'*********

Annexure-A

Statement as referred in reply to Part (a) of the Lok Sabha Question No. 3244 to be answered on 22.03.2017, raised by Shri George Baker,

MP, Lok Sabha regarding Legal Services by NALSA

State-wise details of Village Legal Care & Support Centres set up in the country.

S.No. Name of the SLSAs Number of Village Legal Care & Support Centres set up as on

31.01.2017

l Andhra Pradesh 503 2 Arunachal Pradesh 0 3 Assam 130 4 Bihar 112 5 Chhattisgarh 273 6 Goa 60 7 Gujarat 497 8 Haryana 320 9 flirnachalPradesh 893 10 Jammu & Kashmir 134 11 Jharkhand 305 12 Karnataka 152 l3 Kerala 484 14 Madhya Pradesh 465 15 Maharashtra 464 16 Manipur 13 17 Meghalaya 104 18 Mizoram 42 19 Nruraland 86 20 Odisha 262 21 Punjab 206 22 Rajasthan 5442 23 Sikkim 12 24 TamilNadu 554 25 Telangana 284 26 Tripura 148 27 Uttar Pradesh 3212 28 Uttarakhand 120 29 West Bengal 608

Andaman and Nicobar 15 30 Islands 31 U.T. Chandigarh 9 32 Dadra and Nagar Haveli 12 33 Daman&Diu 10 34 Delhi Nil

35 Lakshadweep Nil 36 Puducherry 55

Total 15986

Annexure-B <Rs. In Lakh)

Statement as referred in reply to Part (b) of the Lok Sabha unstarred Question No. 3244 for 22.03.2017 put down by Shri George Baker, MP, Lok Sabha regarding Legal Services

byNALSA

Details of funds allocated to the State Legal Services Authorities during the last three years and the current year for implementation of various legal aid schemes/programmes.

s. Name of the Amount of Amount of Amount of Amount of No State Authority Funds Funds Funds Funds

Allocated Allocated Allocated Allocated

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

I Andhra Pradesh 300 215 300 400 2 Arunachal 97

Pradesh 122 83.89 00 3 Assam 122 97 200 200 4 Bibar 300 215 50 00 5 Chhattisgarh 222 163 200 100 6 Goa 147 113 50 100 7 Gujarat 257 187 250 100 8 Haryana 277 855.68 50 732.96 9 Hirnachal Pradesh 172 130 800 400 10 J&K 172 130 200 200 11 Jharkhand 142 110 200 800 12 Karnataka 247 180 250 422 13 Kerala 272 347 150 600 14 Madhya Pradesh 182 137 100 00 15 Maharashtra 172 130 200 700 16 Manipur 172 130 50 100 17 Meghalaya 122 97 50 00 18 Mizorarn 147 113 75 250 19 Nagaland** 172 130 100 450 20 Orissa 222 163 200 530 21 Punjab 172, 130 300 400 22 Rajasthan 182 137 200 450 23 Sikkim 122 97 75 100 24 Tamil Nadu 182 137 240 400 25 Telangana 0 215 150 250 26 Tripura ** 122 97 100 250 27 Uttar Pradesh 152 115 100 300 28 Uttarakhand 147 113 100 200 29 West Bengal 147 113 250 100 30 A&N Islands 30 35 50 00 31 U. T. Chandigarh 122 97 50 100 32 D & Nagar Haveli 30 35 50 00 33 Daman&Diu 30 35 50 00 34 Delhi 172 130 331 775 35 Lakshadweep 30· 35 50 00 36 U.T.Puducherry 97 80 50 00

TOTAL 5678 5340.68 5704.89 9409.96 Note: * Telangana came into being in June, 2014.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOK SABHA UNST ARRED QUESTION N0.3246


Renaming of High Court

t3246.PROF: RA VIND RA VISHWANATH GAIKW AD


(a) whether the Government has received proposal from the Government of Maharashtra about renaming the Bombay High Court to Mumbai High Court;

(b) if so, the time by which the said proposal is likely to be approved; and

(c) the reasons for delaying the proposal?

ANSWER



(a): Yes, Madam.

(b) &(c) : The High Courts (Alteration of Names) Bill, 2016 enabling the changing the names of the High Courts of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras into the High Courts of Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai, respectively has been introduced in the Lok Sabha on 19.07.2016. However, the State Government of Tamil Nadu has requested to change the name of the High Court of Madras as the High Court of Tamil Nadu. The High Court of Calcutta has also not agreed for revised nomenclature. The Central Government has again sought views from concerned State Governments and respective High Courts for finalising fresh Bill. No time frame can be fixed for approval of the Bill.

/



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNSDAY, THE 22nd MARCH, 2017

Affordable Justice to Poor

t3309. SHRJ BHAIRON PRASAD MISHRA:


(a) whether the Government has put some system in place to provide justice to the poor who can not afford exorbitant fee of Supreme Court lawyers;

(b) if so, the details thereof; and

(c) if not, whether the Government proposes to put such system in place and the time by which it is likely to be done?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND ruSTICEAND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY


(a) to (c) Poor and marginalized persons are entitled to free legal services under Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The details

of free legal aid services include payment of court fee, providing services of lawyers in legal proceedings. The Legal Services Committees have been functioning at all levels of the judiciary starting from the Supreme Court to the courts at taluka level to provide free legal aid to all eligible categories of persons under the provision mentioned above.

r



LOK SABHA UNST ARRED QUESTION N0.3364


Appointment of SC/HC Judges

3364. SHRI N.K.PREMACHANDRAN:

SHRI DIB YENDU ADHIKARI:


(a) the action taken by the Government to fill up the existing vacancies of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts;

(b) whether the Government received proposal from collegiums regarding such appointments;

(c) if so, the action taken by the Government thereon;

(d) whether the Government and collegiums fixed criteria other than seniority for promotion of . the Judges in service;

( e) if so, the details of the criteria fixed by the Government;

(f) Whether it has come to the notice of the Government that there is violation from the existing norms in the list prepared and sent by High Courts so as to avoid certain Judges; and

(g) if so, the action taken by the Government to make requisite changes and appoint those who are qualified considering their seniority?

ANSWER



(a) to (g) : Filling of vacancies of Judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts is a continuous

and collaborative process of the Judiciary and Executive. While every effort is made to fill up the

existing vacancies expeditiously, vacancies do keep on arising on account of retirement,

resignation or elevation of Judges and increase in Judge strength. Further, on accow1t of court

case regarding the National Judicial Appointments Commission from April, 2015 till the date of

pronouncement of judgement i.e. 16.12.2015, no fresh appointment of Judges in the Supreme

Court and High Courts was made during the period.

After striking down the constitutional validity of the Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment)

Act, 2014 and the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, the Supreme Court

passed an order for improving the Collegium system in December, 2015 by supplementing the

existing Memorandum of Procedure(MoP). As the process was likely to take some time, at the

initiative of the Government of India, the matter was taken up with the Supreme Court and the

process of appointment of Judges has been resumed. Based on the proposals received from the

High Court Collegium, during 2016, 126 fresh appointments of Judges in High Courts and 131

Additional Judges were made Permanent, which is the highest number of appointments made in

the last 26 years. Besides, based on the proposal received from the Supreme Court Collegium, 4

Judges were appointed in the Supreme Court in 2016. During the current year, as on date, 5 more

Judges has been appointed in Supreme Court, 9 more Judges have been appointed in High Courts

and 16 more Additional Judges have been made permanent.

A Judicial Officer is considered for elevation as a Judge of the High Court based on

seniority subject to the fulfillment of prescribed age limit. Besides, other criteria includes the

quality of their Judgements which is scrutinized at the High Court level by a Judgement

Evaluation Committee, ACRs, conduct and clearance from Vigilance angle etc. The proposals

received from the High Court Collegiums are duly examined by the Government as well as by

the Supreme Court Collegium to ensure that meritorious candidates are appointed as High Court

Judges.

* * *

- J



LOK SABHA

UNST ARRED QUESTION NO. t3373

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, 22nd MARCH, 2017

Judicial Reforms t3373. DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR:

DR. UDIT RAJ: SHRI B.N. CHANDRAPPA:


(a) whether the Government is formulating any outline for bringing about judicial reforms for speedy, effective and time bound delivery of justice along with transparency in judicial system for litigants;

(b) if so, the details thereof; (c) whether the Government proposes to carry out structural changes in order to

ensure accountability at every stage; (d) if so, the details thereof; (e) whether the Government has any proposal to conduct study on the

specification of time limits adopted by the other countries in the world; and (f) if so, the response of the Government in this regard?

ANSWER



(a) to (d) : The National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms has twin

objectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and

enhancing accountability through structural changes and by setting performance

standards and improving capacities. The Mission has adopted a co-ordinated approach

for phased liquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial administration by providing

support for better court infrastructure including computerization, encouraging increase in

strength of subordinate judiciary, recommending policy and legislative measures in the

areas prone to excessive litigation, suggesting re-engineering of court procedure for

quick disposal of cases and laying emphasis on human resource development.

(e) & (f) : It may not be valid to compare the time taken for disposal of cases by courts in

the country with the time taken by courts in other countries. The courts in various

countries operate in different environment on account of difference in availability of

infrastructure facilities, use of technology, number of judicial officers per million of

population Uudge-population ratio) , docket ratio (population case filing ratio), provisions

of substantive laws and procedures in courts . No assessment in this regard has been

made.

****************

,l




TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 22"d MARCH, 2017

Video Recording of Proceedings

3379. Dr. UDIT RAJ

Dr. KIRIT P. SOLANKI


./

(a) whether the Government has considered video recording of proceedings in all courts of the country and if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor;

(b) whether such a recording is the fundamental right of a citizen and denying the same breaches Article 21 of the Constitution as right to information forms an integral part of right to life and if so, the details thereof ;

(c) the circumstances under which such recording are permlssible; and

(d) whether the Government has received petitions regarding the same and if so, the details thereof and the response of the Government thereto?

ANSWER


(Shri P. P. CHAUDHARY)

(a) to (d): The decision on video recording of proceedings in all courts of the country lies within the domain of judiciary. The Government has been receiving suggestions for the implementation of audio-video recording of court proceedings.

The issue has also been discussed in the meetings of Advisory

Council of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms. In the meeting of eCommittee of the Supreme Court of India held on sth January, 2014, Hon'ble Chief Justice of India advised deferment of audio-video recording of court proceedings as this would require consultations with Hon'ble Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts.

The matter was taken up with Hon'ble Chief Justice of India. It was taken up for discussion by the full court of the Supreme

Court. No consensus on the subject could emerge. On audiovideo recording, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No.99 of 2015

{Pradyuman Bisht versus Union of India & others), Supreme Court

of India has sought a report from senior counsel on functioning of CCTV cameras (without audio recording) at Gurugaon Courts and after receipt of report, the Supreme Court of India may consider directing installation of CCTV cameras (without audio recording) in one district in every state, under the directions of the concerned High Courts.

Order XVIII Rule 4(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure enables a court to record evidence either in writing or mechanically in the presence of the Judge. Sections 161(3), 164 and 275 of the Code of Criminal Procedure permit recording of evidence of certain witnesses by video electronic means. The Delhi High Court has issued Video-Conferencing guidelines for the conduct of Court Proceedings between courts and remote sites.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)

·LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION N0.384

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 29™ MARCH, 2017

Fast Track Courts

*384. SHRI NISHIKANT DUBEY:


(a) the details of Fast Track Courts (FTCs) functioning In the country, State-wise;

(b) the number of cases disposed of during the last three years and the number of cases pre.sfPntly pending in these courts, Statewise;

(c) the total funds allocated and spent for setting up of these courts during each of the last three years and the current year; and

(d) whether the Government proposes to set up more FTCs in the country and if so, the details thereof, State-wise?

ANSWER



(a) to (d): A Statement Is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (d) OF THE LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION N0.384 FOR 29TH MARCH, 2017 REGARDOMG FAST TRACK COURTS

(a): Setting up of subordinate courts including Fast Track Courts

(FTCs) is the responsibility of the State Governments which in

consultation with the respective High Courts setup such courts

from their own resources. A statement indicating State-wise

number of FTCs reported functional is enclosed as Annexure-1.

(b ): The information on the number of cases disposed of during

the last three years and the number of cases presently pending in

these courts is not maintained centrally. However, as per the

information available and compiled, cases disposed of and

pending in FTCs is enclosed as Annexure-11.

(c) and (d): An amount of Rs.870 crore was released to the State

Governments for FTCs during a period of 11 years from 2000-01

to 2010-2011 and Central funding was discontinued beyond

31.03.2011. The Central grants released to the States for FTCs

from 2000-2001 to 2010-2011 is given as Annexure-111. The

Central Government decided to provide funds upto a maximum of

Rs.BO crore per annum on a matching basis upto 31.03.2015 from

the 13th Finance Commission Award for meeting expenditure on

salaries of the 10% additional positions of Judges being created

in the subordinate Judiciary following the direction of Supreme

Court in the case of Brij Mohan Lal Vs. Union of India. The State

Governments and Chief Justices of the High Courts were

requested to utilize these positions for creation of FTCs also.

The 11th Finance Commission had recommended a

scheme for creation of 1734 FTCs in the country for disposal of

long pending cases and the cases involving undertrial prisoners.

The scheme recommended by the 11th Finance Commission was

for a period of five years upto 2004-05. The Government

accorded its approval for the continuation of central funding of

1562 FTCs that were operational as on 31.3.2005 for a further

period of 5 years i.e. up to 31st March, 2010. The scheme was

continued for another one year upto 31st March, 2011, and

central funding for these FTCs has been discontinued with effect

from 1 •t April, 2011.

The 14th Finance Commission has endorsed the proposal

to strengthen the judicial system in States which includes, inter

alia, establishing 1800 FTCs for a period of five years for cases of

heinous crimes; cases involving senior citizens, women, children,

disabled and litigants affected with HIV AIDS and other terminal

ailments; and civil disputes Involving land acquisition and

property/rent disputes pending for more than five years at a cost

of Rs.4144 crore which is enclosed as Annexure-IV. The 14•h

Finance Commission has urged State Governments to use the

additional fiscal space provided by the Commission in the tax

devolution to meet such requirements.

The Prime Minister vide his letter dated 23n1 April, 2015 has

urged the State Governments to allocate funds for the activities

mentioned in the 14th Finance Commission recommendations

from their State budget from 2015-16 onwards. Further, this issue

was also discussed in the CM/CJ Conference held on 24th April,

2016 wherein it was resolved to strengthen the existing

coordination and monitoring mechanism between the State

Governments and the Judiciary for effective implementation of

the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission. The

Minister of Law and Justice has also urged vide letters dated 3n1

June, 2016 and 26th September, 2016 to all the Chief Ministers of

the States and Chief Justices of High Courts to implement the

resolution of the Conference including the recommendations of

the 14th Finance Commission.

'. Annexure-I STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLYTtlPART (a) OF THE LOK SABHA ST ARRRED QUESTION NO. 384 TO BE REPLIED ON 29™ MARCH ,2017 REGARDING FAST TRACK COURTS

S. No State No. of FTC functional

1 Andhra Pradesh 38 2 Arunachal Pradesh -3 Assam 3 4 Bihar 0 5 Chhattisgarh 14 6 Delhi 13 7 Goa 5 8 Gu.iarat 0 9 Haryana 0 10 Himachal Pradesh -- ~ - 0 11 Jammu & Kashmir -12 Jharkhand 12 13 Karnataka 0 14 Kerala 0 15 Madhya Pradesh 0 16 Maharashtra 100 17 Manipur -18 Meghalaya 0 19 Mizoram -20 Nagaland -21 Odis ha 0 22 Punjab 0 23 Puducherry -24 Rajasthan ' 0 25 Sikkim 1 26 TamilNadu 39 27 Telan2ana 34 28 Tripura 1 29 Uttar Pradesh 183 30 Uttarakhand 4 31 West Bengal 77

Total 524

ANNEXURE-II

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN' REPLY TO PART (b) OF THE LOK SABHA STARRED· QUESTION NO. 384 TO BE REPLIED ON 29rn MARCH, 2017 REGARDING FAST TRACK COURTS.

S.No State Cases disposed of Cases Pending as during the Year on

2013 2014 2015 2016 1 Andhra Pradesh 4157 2639 2781 6n8 as on 31.3.16 2 Arunachal Pradesh . . . . . 3 Assam 5185 4741 2811 5769 as on 12112 4 Bihar . . . . . 5 Chhattlsgarh 847 1474 1596 893 as on 2966 13 on 30.6.16

15.6.16 6 Del hi 1367 1153 1218 273 as on 658 as on 7/16

7/16 7 Goa 284 950 374 2521 as on 2521 as on 31.8.16

31.8.16 8 Gujarat . . . 434090as .

3/11 9 Haryana 1440 1493 1527 0 1553 as on 31.12.15 10 Himachal Pradesh 48051 uptc . . . -

30.3.13 11 Jammu & Kashmir . . . . . 12 Jharkhand 722 834 664 143 2200 as on 31.12.15 13 Karnataka 42898 18496 5389 344834

upto 31.3.15

14 Kera la . . . . 3692 as on 31.12.15 15 Madhya Pradesh . . . . -16 Maharashtra . 259538 182667 81058 -17 Manlpur - - - - . 18 Meghalaya - . . . *202 as on 31.1.11 19 Mlzoram . . . . . 20 Nagai and . . . . . 21 Odis ha 1343 22 Punjab 9219 10875 4072 1259 as on 1292 as on 31.1.16

31.1.16 23 Puducherry . . . . . 24 Rajasthan 111695 126893 25 Sikkim 59 16 12 1 up to 4 as on 31.3.16

31.3.16 26 Tamil Nadu - 29670 19962 - . 27 Telangana 3789 3370 6602 as on 31.3.16 28 Tripura 1114 4179 493 1751 as on 31.12.15 29 Uttar Pradesh . . 19101 . 41001

30 Uttarakhand 8 14 47 37 upto 161 upto 31/5/16 31/5116

31 West Bengal 22466 10256 11122 7370ason 33510 as on 31.7.16 31.7.16

SI. No

1

1

2

3

4 5

6

7 8

9

10 11

12

13 14

15 16

17 18 19 20

21

22 23 24

25 26

27 28

Annexure-111

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (c) AND (d) OF THE LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION N0.384 FOR 29.03.2017

Central Grants released to States for Fast Track Courts from 2000-01 to 2010-11

(Rs. In lakh)

Central Grant released by Department of Justice Name of the Released 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 state from

2000-01 to 2004-05 *

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Andhra 2250.00 550.50 412.80 412.80 142.40 - 1096.00 Pradesh

Arunachal 52.69 19.20 14.40 14.40 14.40 14.40 14.40 Pradesh Assam 530.10 128.00 96.00 96.00 91.20 96.00 96.00 Bihar 4766.40 960.30 720.00 720.00 720.00 720.00 720.00 Chhattisgarh 791.10 198.40 129.60 129.60 148.80 148.80 129.60 Goa 125.10 32.00 24.00 24.00 19.20 14.40 24.00 Gujarat 3226.68 1062.80 1355.90 571.20 580.80 - 777.60 Haryana 422.31 102.40 33.60 67.20 38.40 76.80 67.20 Himachal 108.59 57.60 43.57 0 38.40 43.20 43.20 Pradesh J&K 300.60 - - - - - -Jharkhand 2319.30 569.80 226.00 190. 17 249.60 196.80 192.00

Karnataka 2431.80 595.40 610.80 230.40 182.40 446.40 441.60

Kerala 815.25 198.40 148.80 148.80 148.80 148.80 148.80

Madhya 2223.90 422.50 215.40 259.80 312.00 316.80 316.80 Pradesh

Maharashtra 4352.40 1197.20 1101.60 782.40 417.60 412.80 537.60 Manipur 90.00 12.80 . 9.60 9.60 9.60 9.60 9.60

Meghalaya 90.00 19.20 14.40 0 28.80 - 28.80 Mizoram 90.00 19.20 17.68 14.40 14.40 14.40 14.40

Nagaland 54.90 12.80 18.18 9.60 9.60 9.60 9.60 Orissa 1866.60 262.40 196.80 158.40 158:40 168.00 168.00

Punjab 746.10 115.20 48.00 51.20 0 163.20 81.60

Rajasthan 2238.05 531.40 753.64 398.40 398.40 398.40 398.40

Sikkim 29.70 - - - - - -Tamil Nadu 1151.90 313.70 235.20 235.20 0 470.40 235.20

Tripura 73.80 19.20 3.80 0 0 11.56 0

Uttar Pradesh 6319.80 288.00 3075.69 495.52 1161.60 1161.60 1094.40

Uttarakhand 1173.60 1549.80 216.00 129.60 0 - 99.62 West Bengal 3972.60 761.80 571.20 571.20 571.20 571.20 571.20 Total 42613.27 10000.00 10292.66 5719.89 5456.00 5613.16 7315.62

.. *Grants released to the States from 2000-01 to 2004-2005 by Ministry of Finance

Grand Total

10 4864.50

143.89

1133.30 9326.70

1675.90

262.70 7574.98 807.90

334.56

300.60 3943.67

4938.80 1757.65

4067.20

8801.60 150.80 181.20 184.48 124.28

2978.60

1205.30 5116.69

29.70 2641.60 108.36 13596.6 1 3168.62 7590.40 87010.6 0

ANNEXUREIV STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PART (c) and(d) OF THE LOK SABHA STARRRED QUESTION NO. 384 TO BE REPLIED ON 29m MARCH ,2017 REGARDING FAST TRACK COURTS

14th FINANCE COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS

(Rs. in crore) S.No Name of the State Funds earmarked/

released 1. Andhra Pradesh 108.21 2. Telangana 85.18 3. Assam 82.88 4. Arunachal Pradesh 0.00 5. Mizoram 16.12 6. Nagaland 6.91 7. Bihar 338.43 8. Chhattisgarh 64.46 9. Gujarat 400.59 10. Himachal Pradesh 29.93 11. Jammu & Kashmir 48.35 12. Jharkhand 115.11 13. Karnatak.a 218.72 14. Kerala, Lakshadweep 94.39 15. Madhya Pradesh 306.20 16. Maharashtra, D&N, Daman & Diu 469.67 17. Goa 11.51 18. Manipur 6.91 19. Meghalava 9.21 20. Orissa 145.04 21. Punjab 115.11 22. Chandigarh 4.61

Harvana 110.51 23. Rajasthan 214.11 24. Sikkim 2.3 25. Tamil Nadu, Puducherrv 204.91

26. Tripura 20.72 27. Uttar Pradesh 488.08




TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH MARCH, 2017

Computerisation of Courts

4376. SHRI SADASHIV LOKHANDE


a) whether Government has declared a National Policy and an

action plan for computerisation of all the courts of the country

for providing assistance in getting quick, qualitative and

affordable justice;

b) if so, the main features of this scheme; and

c) the extent to which this policy or action plan has been

implemented in various courts of the country as on date?

ANSWER MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW & JUSTICE AND

ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY {Shri P.P.Chaudhary)

(a) The National Policy and Action Plan for Implementation of Information and Communication Technology in the Indian Judiciary, prepared by the eCommittee of the Supreme Court of India has got approval of the Chief Justice of India. Following the guidelines set under the Policy, the Government of India has launched the eCourts Mission Mode Project for Information and Communication Technology Enablement of Indian Judiciary for providing assistance in getting quick,· qualitative and affordable justice.

(b) Key features of the Project include provisioning of basic infrastructure for ICT enablement which consists of various modules, primarily such as computer hardware, Local Area Network (LAN), internet connectivity and installation of standard application software at each court complex and upgradation of ICT

Page 1of2

Infrastructure of Supreme Court and all High Courts I Benches. It also includes provision of laptops to judicial officers and imparting ICT training to them. Process Re-engineering exercises have been conducted by the High Courts which involve fundamental rethinking and re-designing of judicial processes to bring· about a significant improvement in performance. Additional features of the Project include delivery of the services, inter alia, case registration, causelists, daily case status, and final order/judgment. Further, e-filing of cases, e-payment of court fees, process service through email and through process servers having hand held devices, receipt of digitally signed copies of judgments are also some of the services.

(c) Under the Phase-II of the Project (2015-2019), the Government has released Rs.475.10 crores so far. Judicial proceedings/ decisions of computerised district and subordinate courts of the country are available on the e-Courts portal (http://www.ecourts.gov.in). The portal provides online services to litigants such as details of case registration, cause list, case status, daily orders, and final judgments. As per the information available on the National Judicial Data Grid (given by respective courts), there are 16,934 computerised courts in the country as on 1•t December, 2016. Currently litigants can access case status information in respect of over 7 .8 crore pending and decided cases and more than 4 crore orders/judgements pertaining to these computerised district and subordinate courts. Video Conferencing facility has been enabled between 493 courts and 342 prisons under the Project. Judicial Service Centres (JSC) have been established at all computerised courts which serve as a single window for filing petitions and applications by litigants/ lawyers as also obtaining information on ongoing cases and copies of orders and judgments etc. As part of the Change Management exercise, over 14,000 Judicial Officers and over 4,000 court staff have been trained in CIS software. Furthermore, for the benefit of litigants and lawyers, as many as 7 .24 crore system-generated SMSs have been sent to the litigants and lawyers.

Page Z ofZ



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, 29th MARCH, 2017 ,I

Jurisdiction on High Seas

4389. SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI:


(a) whether at present only Bombay, Calcutta and Madras High Courts are allowed to settle maritime claims;

(b) if so, the details thereof; (c) whether Government has amended the law passed in 1865 allowing High

Courts of all coastal States to settle maritime claims; (d) if so, the details thereof; (e) whether new law is applicable to every vessel irrespective of origin or domicile

of owner; and (f) if so, the extent to which the proposed changes are likely to settle maritime

claims speedily? ANSWER

MINISTER OF ST ATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY


(a) & (b) : The statutory provisions on admiralty jurisdiction flows from British statues

namely (a) the Admiralty Court Act, 1840, (b) the Admiralty Court Act, 1861, (c) Colonial

Courts of Admiralty Act, 1890, (d) Colonial Courts of Admiralty (India) Act, 1891, and (e)

the provisions of the Letters Patent, 1865 applicable to the admiralty jurisdiction of the

Bombay, Calcutta and Madras High Courts. These Acts provide for admiralty

.jurisdiction to only Bombay, Calcutta and Madras High Courts. However, after the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgement on 25th February, 1992 in the matter of M. V.

Elisabeth And Ors. Vs. Harwan Investment And Trading Ltd held that the High Court of

Andhra Pradesh undoubtedly possesses jurisdiction over claims relating to inward and

outward cargo, coastal States are entitled to assume jurisdiction in respect of maritime

claims against foreign merchant ships lying in their waters. These ships are liable to be

arrested and detained for the enforcement on maritime claims.

(c) & (d) : The Government has consolidated the existing laws relating to admiralty

jurisdiction of courts, admiralty proceedings on maritime claims, arrest of vessels and

related issues in the Admiralty (Jurisdiction & Settlement of Maritime Claims) Bill, 2017

(passed by the Lok Sabha on 1 oth March, 2017 and to be introduced in Rajya Sabha for

consideration and passing). The Bill confers admiralty jurisdiction on High Courts

located in coastal states of India and this jurisdiction extends upto territorial waters. The

jurisdiction is extendable, by a Central Government notification, upto ...exclusive

economic zone or any other maritime zone of India or islands constituting part of the

territory of India.

(e) : The Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Bill shall apply to

every vessel, irrespective of the place of residence or domicile of the owner. The Bill

provides that admiralty jurisdiction shall be exercisable by respective High Courts over

the waters up to and including the territorial waters of their respective jltF'isdiction.

(f) : The list of maritime claims has been expanded in line with international uniform

practices. High Courts can arrest a vessel for security and if circumstances require an

·arrested vessel can be sold by the court. Action can also be initiated in person against

settlement of maritime claims. Maritime claims and maritime liens will be subject to

inter-se priority and wages of seafarers shall holds highest priority. ~hip-owners,

charterer, operator and crew are protected from unjustified arrest of vessel.

******

. '



LOK SABHA



Details of Courts I Tribunals

4390. SHRI BADRUDDIN AJMAL:


(a) the number of district courts, session courts, tribunals in the country, State I UT-wise; and

(b) the number of posts of Judges lying vacant in High Courts, district and session courts, State I UT -wise?

ANSWER



(a): The District and Subordinate Courts are set up by the State Governments in

consultation with concerned High Courts. Hence, State I UT-wise list of District and

Subordinate Courts are not maintained centrally. However, as per the Court News

(July-September, 2016) of Supreme Court, the working strength of Judges I Judicial

Officers in District and Subordinate Courts was 16,528 as on 30.09.2016. The State I

UT wise details of working strength of Judges I Judicial Officers of District and

Subordinate Courts in the country are given in the Statement at Annexure - I. Indian

Law Institute (Ill) in its report has identified 36 Tribunals. State I UT-wise list of

Tribunals is not maintained centrally.

(b): The details of vacancies of Judges of the High Courts (High Court-wise) as on

01.03.2017 are given in the Statement at Annexure - II.

' Under the Constitutional framework the responsibility of appointing District

Judges and other members of the State Judicial Service vests with the High Courts and

State Governments. The Central Government has no role in the appointment of

Subordinate Judiciary. However, as per the Court News (July-September, 2016) of

Supreme Court, the details of vacancies of Judges I Judicial Officers in District and

Subordinate Courts as on 30.09.2016 are given in the Statement at Annexure - Ill.

****************

..

Annexure -1 Statement referred to Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 4390 for reply on

29.03.2017 Working Strength of Judges I Judicial Officers of District and Subordinate Courts

. th t 30 09 2016* m e coun ry as on . . Sr. Name of the State I UT Working Strength of Judges I No. Judicial Officers as on

30.09.2016* 1. Uttar Pradesh 1674 2. Andhra Pradesh & T elangana 798

3(a) Mahrashtra 2248 3(b) Goa 46 3(c) Diu and Daman 6 3(d) Silvasa 4(a) West Bengal 885 4(b) Andaman & Nicobar 5. Chhattisgarh 334 6. Delhi 491 7. Gujarat 1133

8(a) Assam 314 8(b) Nagaland 25 8(c) Mizoram 30 8(d) Arunachal Pradesh 17 9. Himachal Pradesh 145 10. Jammu & Kashmir 219 11. Jharkhand 454 12. Karnataka 923

13(a) Kera la 415· 13(b) Lakshadweep 3 14. Madhya Pradesh 1233 15. Manipur 34 16. Meghalaya 41

17(a) Tamil Nadu 948 17(b) Puducherry 14 18. Orissa 606 19. Bihar 1016

20(a) Punjab 548 20(b) Haryana 505 20(c) Chandigarh 30 21. Rajasthan 1081 22. Sikkim 14 23. Tripura 78 24. Uttarakhand 220

Total 16528 *Court News (July-September, 2016) of Supreme Court

************

'

Annexure - II Statement referred to Lok Sabha Un-starred Question No. 4390 for reply on 29.03.2017

Vacancy position of Judges of the High Courts (High Court-wise) as on 01.03.2017

Sr.

No. High Court Number of Vacancies

1 Allahabad 75

2 High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad 34

3 Bombay 32

4 Calcutta 35

5 Chhattisgarh 12

6 Delhi 22

7 Gau ha ti 07

8 Gujarat 21

9 Himachal Pradesh 04

10 Jammu & Kashmir 08

11 Jharkhand 12 -

12 Karnataka 31

13 Kera la 11

14 Madhya Pradesh 16

15 Madras 20

16 Manipur 02

17 Meghalaya 01

18 Orissa 09

19 Patna 23

20 Punjab & Haryana 39

21 Rajasthan 17

22 Sikkim 01

23 Tripura 01

24 Uttarakhand 04

Total 437

******************

•

Annexure - Ill Statement referred to Lok Sabha Un-starred Question No. 4390 for reply on 29.03.2017 Vacancy position of Judges I Judicial Officers of the District and Subordinate Courts as

on 30.09.2016 Sr. Name of State I UT Number of Vacancies No.

1 Arunachal Pradesh 0 2 Andhra Pradesh & Telengana 223 3 Assam 108 4 Bihar 792 5 Chandigarh 0 6 Chhattisgarh 55 7 Daman & Diu and Dadra Naoar Haveli 3 8 Delhi 307 9 Goa 10 10 Gujarat 794 11 Harvana 137 12 Himachal Pradesh 15 13 Jammu and Kashmir 26 14 Jharkhand 214 15 Karnataka 367 16 Kera la 89 17 Lakshadweep 0 18 Madhya Pradesh 202 19 Maharashtra 99 20 Manipur 11 21 Meghalaya 16 22 Mizoram 32 23 NaQaland 8 24 Orissa 191 25 Puducherry 12 26 Punjab 127 27 Rajasthan 210 28 Sikkim 04 29 Tamil nadu 79 30 Tripura 29 31 Uttar Pradesh 595 32 Uttarakhand 58 33 West BenQal and A & N Islands 124 Total 4937

Source: Court News (July-September, 2016) of Supreme Court *****************



TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH MARCH, 2017.

Divorce Cases

M397. SHRI JUGAL Kl SHORE: SHRIMATI KAMLA DEVI PAATLE:


(a) whether the cases of divorce are on the rise in the country; (b) if so, the details thereof and the number of divorce cases pending

before the family courts in each State of the country during each of the last three years and the current year and the steps taken by the Government to dispose off these cases early;

(c) whether the Government has received proposals from various States to set up more family courts in the country to meet the demand;

(d) if so, the details thereof and the State-wise details of the steps taken by the Government in this regard;

(e) whether the Government proposes to amend the Hindu Marriage Act,

1955 and Special Marriage Act, 1954; and

(f) if so, the details of various acts and laws for resolving the increasing

·divorce cases in the country?

ANSWER



(a) to (d): No data relating to divorce cases is maintained separately. However, as per the information furnished by the Hon'ble High Courts, a statement giving details of cases pending in Family Courts, State/UT-wise which, lnter-alia, Includes divorce cases is given in the Annexure. In the Chief Ministers and Chief Justices Conference, 2015, directions have been issued to all High Courts to regularly monitor and take necessary steps for early disposal of such cases. Setting up of Family Courts is the responsibility of the State Government and High Courts.

(e) and (f): At present, there Is no proposal to amend the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Special Marriage Act, 1954.

Annexure - "'

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (D) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.4397 TO BE ANSWERED ON 29.03.2017 ASKED BY

SHRI JUGAL KISHORE AND SHRIMATI KAMLA DEVI PAATLE, MPs

The total number of cases pending In Family Courts are as follows:-

SI. No. State Cases Pending

1 Andhra Pradesh 2507

2 Assam-3109 3209

Arunachal Pradesh-62

Nagaland-26

Mizoiam-12

3 Blhar 50847

4 Chhattlsgarh 2769

5 Delhi 11862

6 Goa 933

7 Gujarat 10042

8 Haryana 15256

9 Himachal Pradesh* -10 Jammu & Kashmir 1490

11 Jharkhand 14261

12 Karnataka 22972

13 Kera la 52446

14 Madhya Pradesh 46866

15 Maharashtra & Diu, Daman, Dadar & Nagar Haven 45690

16 Manlpur 434

17 Meghalaya * -18 Odisha 22035

19 Punjab 4533

20 Puducherry 748

21 Rajasthan 14309

22 Sikkim 125

23 Tamil Nadu 37618

24 Telangana 1292

25 Trlpura 971

26 Uttar Pradesh 5466

27 Uttarakhand 8048

28 West Bengal 1091

* At present, no Famlly Court In the State of Hlmachal Pradesh and Meghalaya.

.;:-·-· GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE


LOK SABHA



Hindi and Other Regional Languages in Courts

4433 SHRI AJAY MISRA TENI:


(a) whether the Government is considering to make use of Hindi and other regional languages in the proceedings of High Courts compulsory;


(c) the efforts made by the Government so far for use of Hindi and other regional languages in the proceedings of court?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE & ELELCTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI P .P. CHAUDHARY)

(a) to (c) : In terms of the provisions under Article 348 (2) of the Constitution and Section 7

of the Official Language Act, 1963, use of Hindi has been authorized in the Proceedings as

well as in the Decree, Judgments in the High Courts of the States of Rajasthan, Madhya

Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

The requests relating to use of Tamil, Hindi & Gujrati languages in the High Courts

of Madras, Chhattisgarh and Gujrat respectively were forwarded to Hon'ble the Chief

Justice of India in accordance with the decision dated 21.05.1965 of the Cabinet

Committee which required that consent of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India be

obtained on any proposal relating to use of a language other than English in the High

Court.

Contd ..... p.2/-

-2-

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India on 18.01.2016 has conveyed that the Full Court,

after extensive deliberations, d.id not favour the proposals and reiterated the

Resolution which was adopted on 07.05.1997 and was reiterated on 15.12.1999 and

on 11.10.2012, also keeping in view the Cabinet Committee decision dated 21.5.1965.

•




Special Courts

4460. SHRI G.M. SIDDESHWARA:

Wiii the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) the details of Special Courts set up to examine the cases

pertaining to atrocities on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes in the country, including In Karnataka;

{b) the number of cases decided during the last three years in the

country in the above courts, State-wise; and

{c) the details of the cases pending as on 31•t December, 2016 in the

country, State-wise?

ANSWER



(a) to (c): Establishment of Special Court falls within the domain of the State Government who in consultation with the High Court set up such Courts as per their requirement from their own resources In accordance with Section 14 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015. The Act further empowers the State Government to specify for each district, a Court of Session to be a Special Court for the purpose in Districts where less number of cases under this Act are recorded. The number of special courts set up by various States during the last

·three years including the current year and the number of cases decided and pending in these courts are not maintained centrally.

***

' .



LOK SABHA



Holidays in Judiciary 4518 SHRI SUBHASH PATEL:

DR BHARATIBEN D. SHYAL: SHRI RAMSINH RATHWA:


(a) whether there are highest number of holidays in the judiciary in comparison to the executive and legislature and if so, the reasons therefor;

(b) whether reducing the number of holidays, having courts work on Sundays, filling up all the vacancies of Judges at a fast rate and restricting the numbers of hearings could be helpful for early disposal of all the pending cases; and

(c) if so, the details of the steps being taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER



(a) to (c): Working days/hours and duration of vacations in the Supreme Court and in the High Courts are regulated by Rules framed by the respective Court. The working days as well as working hours of the District/Subordinate Courts are regulated by the respective High Court.

Disposal of cases pending in courts is within the domain of judiciary. The Government has adopted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased liquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial systems, which, inter-alia, involves better infrastructure for courts including computerisation, increase in strength of judicial officers/judges, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation and emphasis on human resource development. .

Contd .... p.2/-

-2-

Filling up of vacancies of Judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts is a continuous and collaborative process of the Judiciary and Executive involving various Constitutional Authorities. The subject matter relating to filling up of vacancies in the District and Subordinate Courts falls within the domain of the High Courts and the State Governments concerned. The Central Government has no role in the appointment of Subordinate Judiciary.

------......

('


LOK SABHA



Subordinate Courts as FTCs

4570. DR. GOKARAJU GANGA RAJU: SHRI RADHESHYAM BISWAS: SHRI SUBHASH PATEL:


(a) whether Government has proposed to allow States to use funds available for morning and evening courts to further increase the number of Fast Track Courts (FTCs) to expedite trial of pending cases particularly those of sexual assault and heinous crime and if so, the details thereof;

(b) whether any special grants are disbursed to the States by the Centre for FTCs and if so, the details thereof; and

(c) whether certain subordinate courts have been converted into FTCs, country-wise and whether their infrastructure have been proposed to be upgraded at par with FTCs and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER



(a) to (c): The creation of Subordinate Courts are the responsibility of the State Governments which in consultation with the respective High Courts create such Courts as per their requirement from their own resources. The 14th Finance Commission has endorsed the proposal of the Union Government to strengthen the justice delivery system in the States at a cost of Rs.4144 crore that includes, inter-alia, establishing 1800 FTCs for a period of five years to take up trial of cases of heinous crimes, involving senior citizens, women etc. The 14th Finance Commission has urged the State Governments to use the additional fiscal space provided by the Commission in the tax devolution to meet such requirements. As per information available, currently a total of 524 FTCs are functional in the country.

***

.; . GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

****** .LOK SABHA



Plight of Under Trials

4585. SHRI MAHEISH GIRRI:

Will the Minister of LAW AND ruSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether there have been a large number of cases in which poor people despite getting relief are kept inside the jail for want of bail bonds and local sureties;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor;

( c) whether the Government is taking steps to drop such clauses in the bail law that create difficulties for the poor to come out of jail despite getting relief from the court;

( d) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor;

( e) whether the Government plans to introduce a legislation to bring uniformity in grounds for grant of bail to under-trials; and

(f) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER



(a) and (f) Information relating to Under Trials who got relief from court but could not be released due to lack of bail bonds and local sureties is not maintained centrally as it is a State subject.

There are adequate legal provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (CrPc) to resolve the plight of Under Trials. Minister of Law & Justice has written to the Chief Justices of High Courts on 3rd February 2017 requesting for periodic monitoring of release of Under Trials so that every accused person receives a fair trial and does not languish in jail longer than is absolutely necessary as per law.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 05.09.2014 in the Writ Petition No. 310/2005-Bhim Singh Vs Union of India & Other relating to the undertrial prisoner has directed for effective implementation of Section 436 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The DG (Prisons)/IG (Prisons) of all States/UTs have been requested on 22.09.2014 to take necessary action to comply with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter.

'Prisons' is a State subject as per Entry 4 of the List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. Therefore, the administration and management of prisons is primarily the responsibility of the State Governments. However, the Ministry of Home Affairs has prepared a new Model Prison Manual 2016 covering all aspects of prisons and copy of the same has been sent to the States/UTs for guidance.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court further vide orders dated 05.02.2016 had inter alia passed directions in the aforesaid matter, which are as under:

1. The Under Trial Review Committee in every district should meet every quarter and the first such meeting should take place on or before 31st March, 2016. The Secretary of the District Legal Services Committee should attend each meeting of the Under Trial Review Committee and follow up the discussions with appropriate steps for the release of undertrial prisoners and convicts who have undergone their sentence or are entitled to release because of remission granted to them.

2. The Under Trial Review Committee should specifically look into aspects pertaining to effective implementation of Section 436 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 436A of the Cr.P.C. so that undertrial prisoners are released at the earliest and those who cannot furnish bail bonds due to their poverty are not subjected to incarceration only for that reason. The Under Trial Review Committee will also look into issue of implementation of the Probation of Offenders Act, 195 8 particularly with regard to first time offenders so that they have a chance of being restored and rehabilitated in society.

3. The Member Secretary of the State Legal Services Authority of every State will ensure, in coordination with the Secretary of the District Legal Services Committee in every district, that an adequate number of competent lawyers are empanelled to assist undertrial prisoners and convicts, particularly the poor and indigent, and that legal aid for the poor does not become poor legal aid.

4. The Secretary of the District Legal Services Committee will also look into the issue of the release of undertrial prisoners in compoundable offences, the effort being to effectively explore the possibility of compounding offences rather than requiring a trial to take place.

5. The Under Trial Review Committee will also look into the issues raised in the Model Prison Manual 2016 including regular jail visits as suggested in the said Manual.





Increase in Judges in High Courts

-4596. SHRI P. NAGARAJAN:


(a) whether Government has decided to increase the number of judges in High Courts during the year 201 7;


( c) if not, the reasons for not increasing the strength of High Court judges across the country?

ANSWER MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND



(a) to (c): After receiving the approval from the State Governments and the High Courts and with the approval of the Chief Justice of India, the Judge strength of the High Courts has been increased from 906 in 01.06.2014 to 1079 as on date.

As per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Order dated 2.1.2017 in the matter of of Imtiyaz Ahmed case, the Department of Justice has forwarded a copy of the interim report of the National Court Management System (NCMS) Committee to all State Governments and High Courts to enable them to take follow up action to determine the required strength of Judges in the district judiciary based on the NCMS report. It has inter-alia, observed that in the long term, the judge strength of the Subordinate Courts will have to be assessed by a scientific method to determine the total number of "Judicial Hours" required for disposing of the case load of each court. In the interim, this Committee has proposed a "weighted" disposal approach i.e disposal weighted by the nature and complexity of cases in local conditions.

Further, the Supreme Court in its Order dated 20.3.2017 in W.P. (C) Nos. 295 and 624 of 2016 has stated that there are a number of unfilled posts of Judges at various levels and therefore increasing the number of posts of Judges will arise only after filling up of these existing vacancies.

*****

_,

/





Vacancies in High Court

4598. SHRI RAMEN DEKA:


(a) the sanctioned strength of judges in Guwahati High Court; and

(b) whether vacancies exist in the said court and if so, the details thereof and the steps being taken to fill by these vacancies at the earliest?

ANSWER




(a) & (b): There are 24 sanctioned posts of Judges in Gauhati High Court. Out of this, as on 24.03.2017, 7 posts of Judges are lying vacant.

Filling up of vacancies in High Courts is a continuous and collaborative process of the Judiciary and the Executive. While every effort is made to fill up the existing vacancies expeditiously, vacancies keep on arising on account of retirement, resignation or elevation of Judges and increase in the Judge strength of High Courts. Hence, the time frame for filling up of the vacancies cannot be indicated. However, during the calendar year 2016, 5 judges have been appointed in the Gauhati High Court so far.

*****



LOK SABHA

UNST ARR ED QUESTION N0.4599


Vacancies in Courts 4599 DR. A. SAMPATH:


(a) whether the Government is aware of the large number of vacancies in clerical and office Assistant post in many District and High Courts of the country;

(b) if so, the details of the number of vacancies in clerical and office Assistant posts, District Courts and High Courts-wise; and

(c) whether these vacancies have led to severe stagnation of cases in many Courts and if so, the steps taken by the Government to rectify the same?

ANSWER



(a) & (b) Information relating to vacancies in non-judicial staff in High Courts and subordinate judiciary is centrally not maintained as the matter comes under the purview of the High Courts and State Governments.

(c) Disposal of pending cases in courts is within the domain of judiciary. The Government has adopted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased liquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial systems, which, inter-alia, involves better infrastructure for courts including computerisation, increase in strength of judicial officers/judges, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation and emphasis on human resource development.

------......



TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE STH APRIL, 2017

Special Courts for Crime against Women

5076. SHRI BADRUDDIN AJMAL:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state: (a) ·whether Government has set up special courts for hearing of rape cases separately; (b) if so, the number of such courts in the country, State-wise; (c) if not, whether the Government considers to set up such courts for speedy hearing

of rape cases; and (d) the number of rape/sexual harassment cases registered in the country during the

-last three years, State/UT-wise?

ANSWER



(a) to (c): Setting up of the Subordinate Courts including special courts for hearing of

rape cases lies within the domain of the State Governments which in consultation with

the High Courts may set up such courts. The Government of India proposed setting up of

1800 "Fast Track Courts (FTCs) as a component of. its Memorandum to the 14th Finance

Commission to dispose cases pertaining to heinous crimes including those of rape. The

14th Finance Commission noted that the proposal of the Government was arrived at after

an extensive consultation process with the States and endorsed the proposal of the

Government for incurring Rs.4144 crore and setting up of additional 1800 FTCs for a

period of five years (2015-20). Tha 14th FC further urged the State Governments to use the

additional fiscal space provided by the Commission in the tax devolution to meet such

requirements.

The Hon'ble Prime Minister vide his letter dated 23n1 April, 2015 has urge~

the State Governments to allocate funds for the activities mentioned in the 14th FC

recommendations from their State budget from 2015 .. 1& onwards. Further, this

issue was also discussed in the CM/CJ Conferences held 5th April, 2015 and on 24th

April, 2016 wherein it was resolved to strengthen the existing coordination and

monitoring mechanism between the State Governments and the Judiciary for

effective implementation of the recommendations of the 14th FC. The Minister of

Law and Justice has also urged vide letters dated 03n1 June, 2015 and 26th

September, 2016 to all the Chief Ministers of the States and Chief Justices of High

Courts to implement the resolution of the Conference including the

recommendations of the 14th FC.

(d): Information is not maintained centrally. However, as per the information furnished

by National Crime Records Bureau, the State/UT wise cases registered in the country

during the last three years is given as Annexure-1.

Annexure-1 STATEMENT REFFERED TO IN REPLY TO PART (d) OF LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.5076 FOR 5TH MARCH, 2017.

" - State/UT-wise cases registered under various sexual crimes durlnll 2013-2015

State/UT Rape (section 376 IPC) Attempt to Assault on Women with Insult to the Modesty of Protection of Children commit Rape Intent to outrage her Women (section 509 IPC) from Sexual Offences

(section 376/511 Modesty (section 354 IPC) Act,2012• IPC)*

SI. 20 20 20 20 No. 2013 2014 2015 13 14 15 2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015 13 2014 2015

1 Andhra Pradesh 1635 961 1027 - 165 206 6930 4547 4616 4702 2649 2200 106 237

2 Arunachal Pradesh 75 83 71 10 12 93 121 101 3 3 2 - 5 12

3 Assam 1937 1980 1733 - 227 499 2409 3099 4293 14 1 111 - 311 731

4 Bthar 1128 1127 1041 - 484 403 331 572 198 52 69 96 - 57 60

5 Chhattlsl!arh 1380 1436 1560 - 21 19 2261 2122 1868 180 79 53 417 1164

6 Goa 86 95 86 - 2 0 162 202 150 54 57 34 4 0

7 Gula rat 732 841 503 - 6 3 1243 1352 1164 77 173 73 - 118 1416

8 Harvana 971 1174 1070 - 136 105 1560 1688 1886 643 102 90 3 440

9 Himachal Pradesh 250 283 244 5 1 493 538 434 111 60 58 22 3

10 lammu & Kashmir 378 331 296 20 21 1389 1421 1343 354 237 175 0 0

11 lharkhand 1204 1050 1053 208 202 524 440 844 18 18 10 - 31 141

12 Kamataka 1030 1324 589 22 16 3913 5263 5112 137 170 154 - 620 1480

13 Kerala 1221 1347 1256 - 36 30 4362 4367 3987 404 257 267 - 439 516

14 Madhya Pradesh 4335 5076 4391 - 56 57 8252 9609 8049 736 429 390 126 1687

15 Maharashtra 3063 3438 4144 15 13 8132 10001 11713 2632 1575 1119 190 26

16 Maninur 72 75 46 1 1 59 98 84 0 0 2 7 25

17 Meclialava 183 118 93 - 26 23 98 105 95 0 54 20 48 118

18 Mizoram 89 120 58 1 6 81 97 75 0 29 2 - 42 114

19 Nai!aland 31 30 35 - 3 1 18 16 8 1 1 9 - 0 5

20 Odis ha 1832 1978 2251 33 137 4618 5543 6499 426 379 472 109 19

21 Pun Jab 888 981 886 154 128 1045 1113 1123 67 35 27 25 18

22 Raiasthan 3285 3759 3644 - 373 407 4829 5999 4813 25 18 9 - 191 222

23 Sikkim 43 47 5 - 9 1 29 34 21 0 3 2 23 54

24 Tamil Nadu 923 455 421 - 16 29 1271 1102 1163 313 229 20 ·- 1055 1544

25 Telanl!llna 979 1105 - 73 43 3188 3608 1142 1288 25 264

26 Trlpura 233 239 213 - 35 38 407 492 352 7 11 6 32 0

27 Uttar Pradesh 3050 3467 3025 - 324 422 7303 8605 7885 25 29 11 - 3637 3078

28 Uttarakhand 228 270 283 - 41 10 295 343 318 72 4 12 - 74 99 165 155

29 West8en al 1685 1466 1199 6 1 4913 5670 5069 577 543 455 - 1058 1289

;).t' )..J)

30 A&N Islands 27 32 36 0 0 45 ""· '41 57 8 5 5 0 1

31 Chandigarh 45 59 72 6 6 143 87 76 26 2 10 0 1

32 D&N Havel! 5 5 8 0 0 1 2 5 1 1 0 0 13

33 Daman& Dlu 8 2 5 0 0 2 3 7 0 0 0 - 0 4

34 Delhi UT 1636 2096 2199 - 70 46 3515 4322 5367 916 1361 1492 107 86

35 Lakshadweep 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 6 0 2 1 - 1 1

Source: Crime In India

/')-'\·~) .... '

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE


LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 5130.

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 5th April. 2017

Recommendation of Law Commission

5130. SHRI BAIJAYANT JAY PANDA:


(a) whether the Government has taken any measures aimed at implementing the recommendations of the Law Commission to set up new courts in the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof; (c) if not, the reasons therefor; (d) whether the Government is taking any steps to increase the judge to

population ratio in India; (e) if so, the details thereof; and (f) if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER



(a) to (f) : The matter relating to the appointment of Judges I Judicial Officers in

District and Subordinate Courts falls within the domain of State Governments and

the High Courts. However, in the case of lmtiyaz Ahmed versus State of Uttar

Pradesh and others, the Supreme Court had asked the Law Commission of India to

evolve a method for scientific assessment of the number of additional courts to clear

the backlog of cases. In 245th report (2014), the Law Commission has observed that

filing of cases per capita varies substantially across geographic units as filings are

associated with economic and social conditions of the population. As such the Law

Commission did not consider the judge population ratio to be a scientific criterion for

determining the adequacy of the judge strength in the country. The Law

Commission found that in the absence of complete and scientific approach to data

collection across various High Courts in the country, the "Rate of Disposal" method

to calculate the number of additional judges required to clear the backlog of cases as

well as to ensure that new backlog is not created, is more pragmatic and useful. In

May, 2014, the Supreme Court asked the State Governments and the High Courts to

file their response to the recommendations made by the Law Commission. In

August 2014, the Supreme Court asked the National Court Management System

Committee (NCMS) to examine the recommendations made by the Law Commission

and to furnish their recommendations in this regard. NCMS submitted its report to

the Supreme Court in March, 2016. It has, inter-alia, observed that in the long term,

the judge strength of the subordinate courts will have to be assessed by a scientific

method to determine the total number of "Judicial Hours" required for disposing of

the case load of each court. In the interim, the Committee has proposed a

"weighted' disposal approach - disposal weighted by the nature and complexity of

cases in local conditions. The matter is sub-judice before the Supreme Court, at

present. As per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Order dated

02.01.2017, the Department of Justice has forwarded a copy of interim report of the

NCMS Committee to all State Governments and High Courts to enable them to take

follow up action to determine the required Strength of Judges in district judiciary

based on the NCMS report.

*************

JI



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, osTH APRIL, 2017

Oldest Pending Case

5139. DR. ANUPAM HAZRA


(a) the details of the oldest criminal and civil cases pending in the Supreme Court and High Courts of the country; and

(b) the steps taken by Government to improve the condition of these. backlog in courts?

ANSWER


(SHRI P. P. CHAUDHARY}

(a): The data on pendency of cases in courts including pendency of oldest civil and

criminal cases in courts are maintained by Supreme Court and High Courts. As per

information made available by Supreme Court, the oldest criminal matter pending in the

Supreme Court is Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 1991 and the oldest civil matter pending

the Supreme Court is Writ Petition (Civil) No. 7672 of 1982 as on 31.03.2017. The data

-on pendency of oldest civil and criminal cases as on 30.06.2016 was collected from

High Courts. Based on the information received from High Courts, details of oldest civil

and criminal cases pending in High Courts are given in a Statement at Annexure.

(b) : Disposal of cases pending in courts is within the domain of Judiciary. The

Government has adopted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased


infrastructure for courts including computerisation, increase in strength of judicial

" ' officers I judges, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive


During the Joint Conference of Chief Ministers of States and Chief Justices of the

High Courts held at New Delhi in April 2015, reduction of pendency and backlog of

cases in courts emerged as an area which required focused attention at the High Court

level. The Chief Justices of the High Courts in the Conference held on 03rd and 04th

April 2015 have resolved that each High Court shall establish an Arrears Committee,

which would go into the factors responsible for the delays and prepare an action plan to

clear the backlog of cases pending for more than five years. It was further resolved in

the Conference of Chief Justices of the High Courts held in April, 2016, that in order to

ensure expeditious disposal of cases pertaining to women, marginalized segments,

senior citizens and differently-abled, steps be taken to (a) prioritize the disposal of

cases falling in these categories within the existing court system; (b) an endeavour be

made to revisit the cadre strength of subordinate courts and, where necessary, create

· additional courts to deal with such cases. As per information available, Arrears

Committees have been set up by the High Courts.

In addition, following steps have also been taken by the Government in the

matter.

(i) The sanctioned strength of Judges of High Courts has been increased from 906

judges in June 2014 to 1079 judges in May, 2016.

(ii) The sanctioned strength of the subordinate judiciary has been increased from

20, 174 at the end of 2014 to 21,374 in September, 2016 .

. (iii) The filling of vacancies of Judges I Judicial officers in Districts and Subordinate

Courts is within the domain of the State Governments and the High Courts

concerned. However, Government takes up the matter with the High Courts from

time to time to fill up the vacancies of Judges I Judicial Officers of District and

Subordinate Courts.

(iv) In May 2015, a communication was addressed to the Chief Justices of High

Courts requesting them to apprise the action being taken to make the recruitment

process more broad based to fill up the existing vacancies of judicial officers I

judges at all levels in the District and Subordinate Courts to enable the

Government to take a view on the need for formation of All India Judicial Service.

Most of the High Courts have indicated that the recruitment process which is in

their domain for vacancies in subordinate judiciary at all levels has been

expedited in terms of the resolution passed in the Conference of Chief Justices

held in New Delhi in April 2015. The selections for the various posts in

subordinate judiciary are being conducted by State Governments I High Courts in

consonance with the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malik Mazhar

Sultan case Vs UP Public Service Commission.



(vi) Promotion of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism is a key strategy

for reducing delays and pendency in courts.

(vii) National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is a key tool for access to justice for

poor people in India, under the overall supervision of the Chief Justice of India as

the Patron-in Chief. It organised the National Lok Adalat in February, 2017. 6.39

lakh pending cases and 2.95 lakh cases at the pre-litigation stage were disposed.


(ix) Recently, the Government has launched a nation-wide drive to reduce the

number of cases pending in courts by curtailing the Government litigations. The

Government has written to all Ministers of Central Ministries and Chief Ministers

of States to launch 'special arrears clearance drives' to reduce pending cases

and minimize fresh litigations.

(x) Based on the proposals received from the High Court Collegium, during the year

2016, 126 fresh appointment of Judges in High Courts and 131 Additional Judges

were made permanent, which is the highest number of appointments made in the

last 26 years. In addition, the tenure of 22 Additional Judges of High Courts was

also extended. Besides, based on the proposal received from the Supreme

Court Collegium, 4 judges were appointed in the Supreme Court in 2016. During

the current year (2017), as on date, 5 more Judges have been appointed in

4 '

Supreme Court, 9 more Judges have been appointed in High Courts and 16

more Additional Judges have been made permanent.

(xi) The 14th Finance Commission has endorsed the proposal to strengthen the

judicial system in States which· includes, inter-alia, establishing 1800 FTCs for a

period of five years for cases of heinous crimes; cases involving senior citizens,

women, children, disabled and litigants affected with HIV AIDS and other terminal

ailments; and civil disputes involving land acquisition and property I rent disputes

pending for more than five years at a cost of Rs. 4144 crore. The 14th Finance

Commission has urged State Governments to use the additional fiscal space

provided by the Commission in the tax devolution to meet such requirements.

The Hon'ble Prime Minister had written to all Chief Ministers on 23rd April, 2015

followed by reminders from the Hon'ble Minister of Law & Justice to make

available the fund recommended by the 14th Finance Commission to judiciary

from the additional fiscal space available under the 14th Finance Commission.

(xii) As per the resolution adopted in the Joint Conference held in New Delhi on 24th

April, 2016, The Government vide its letter dated 26th September, 2016

requested the State Governments to strengthen the institutional mechanism

between the State and the Judiciary where the Chief Secretary and his team and

2 or 3 Judges of the High Court to regularly meet and monitor utilisation of plan

fund and timely completion of infrastructure and eCourts Mission Mode Project.

The States have also been requested to assist Judiciary in preparing perspective

I annual plan for various activities to be undertaken in the justice sector on

account of enhanced devolution of funds to the States under the 14th Finance

Commission. In addition, the States were requested to provide technical

manpower for ICT upgradation.

(xiii) The Government vide a letter dated 3 Feb 2017, addressed the Chief Justices of

the 24 High Courts, raising concerns regarding the increased number of

undertrials in jails across the country. The Government, in underscoring the

importance of fair trial for every accused, requested the High Court to advise the

district judiciary to ensure effective implementation of Section 436A Code of

Criminal Procedure and ensure periodic monitoring of the associated Undertrial

Review Committee mechanism. So far, two High Courts - Punjab and Haryana

High Court and Madhya Pradesh High Court - have responded to this letter who

have assured action on this front.

. ·(xiv) As per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Order dated 02.01.2017

in the matter of lmtiyaz Ahmed Case, the Department of Justice has forwarded a

copy of interim report of the NCMS (National Court Management System)

Committee to all State Governments and High Courts to enable them to take

follow up action to determine the required Strength of Judges in district judiciary

based on the NCMS report.

(xv) Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of

High Court Act, 2015 has been notified on 1st January, 2016 to have a

streamlined procedure for the conduct of cases in the Commercial Division and in

the Commercial Court by amending the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for

commercial cases so as to improve the efficiency and reduce delays in disposal

of commercial cases.

(xvi) Necessary amendments have been made to Arbitration and Conciliation Act,

1996 to make the award within 12 months, to resolve the dispute through fast

track procedure, to ensure Neutrality of arbitrators, and to restrict the term

'Public Policy of India' (as a ground for challenging the award)

(xvii) The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act 2015 has been notified to clarify

the jurisdiction where dishonour of cheque cases may be filed and provide for

transfer of cases to the appropriate jurisdiction and consolidation of multiple

cases filed in different courts.

(xviii) The Government vide a letter dated 7th Feb 2017, addressed the Chief Justices

of the all High Courts has requested to speed up the process of implementation

of e-courts project for actualising the objectives of the Project.

************

Annexure Statement referred to Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 5139 for reply on

. 05.04.2017 Old t c· "I d C . . IC d' . H" h C rts 30 06 2016 es IVI an r1mma ases pen mg m IQ OU as on . .

Sr. Name of High Court Oldest case pending since the year

No. Civil Criminal

1 Allahabad 1971 1976

2 Andhra Pradesh 1985 2001

3 Bombay 1980 1991

4 Chhattisgarh 1989 1994

5 Delhi 1968 1994

6 Gauhati 1998 2003

7 Gujarat 1977 1986

8 Himachat Pradesh 1991 2000

9 Jammu and Kashmir 1979 1976

10 Jharkhand 1958 1990

11 Karnataka 1987 1997

12 Kera la 1981 1996

13 Madhya Pradesh 1972 1992

14 Madras 1986 1997

15 Manipur 1999 2008

16 Meghalaya 2008 2010

17 Orissa 1961 1987

18 Patna 1967 1980

19 Punjab & Haryana 1971 1985

20 Rajasthan 1956 1981

21 Sikkim 2008 2015

22 Tripura 2002 2009

23 Uttarakhand 2011 2015

*Information pertaining to Calcutta High Court is not available. ***********



TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 5™ APRIL, 2017

Judicial Academy in Andhra Pradesh

5197. SHRI CH. MALLAREDDY:


(a) whether the Government is mulling to set up a Judicial Academy in Andhra Pradesh and if so, the details thereof;

(b) whether the lawyers forum and judicial experts have advocated for such an Academy; and

(c) if so, the details thereof and time by which the academy would be set up in the State and if no, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER

MINISTER Of STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY


(a) to(c): The decision of establishment of a Judicial Academy lies within the domain of the State Governments. As per the Information made available by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, after the bifurcation of the Andhra Pradesh, an Academy for the State of Andhra Pradesh will be established in the proposed Justice City at Amravati, Andhra Pradesh in consultation with the High Court, .....

'fhe lawyer' forum and judicial experts have not advocated for such an Academy.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND WSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE



Reservation for Women in Judiciary

5218. SHRIMATI BUTTARENUKA:


(a) the total number of women judges working in different High Courts;

(b) the percentage of women judges in the Judiciary;

( c) whether the Government is taking any steps to increase the number of women judges in various High Courts and if so, the details thereof; and

( d) whether there is any proposal to provide reservation for women in the appointment of High Court Judges and in Lower Judiciary?

ANSWER



(a) to (d): There are 69 Women Judges working in different High Courts as on 29.3.2017, which

in percentage terms is 10.86% of working strength. Appointment of Judges of the Supreme

Court and High Courts is made under Articles 124 and 217 of the Constitution of India

respectively. These Articles do not provide for reservation for any caste or class of persons.

There is no proposal to provide reservation for women in the appointment of High Court Judges.

The Government has, however been requesting the Chief Justices of the High Courts that while

sending proposals for appointment of Judges, due consideration be given to suitable candidates

belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Minorities and

Women. The appointment of Judges in the Lower Judiciary is in the domain of State

Governments.

* * *



****** LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNSDA Y, THE 5TH APRIL, 2017

Free Legal Aid t5219 DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR :


(a) whether free legal aid is being provided to all the juveniles facing trial in Juvenile courts across the country;


( c) the extent to which the same is likely to help in resettlement of children who have strayed from social life?

ANSWER



(a) and (b) Under Section 12 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987,juveniles,

who are covered under a separate category "children" are entitled to free legal

services. Free legal aid includes payment of court fees, providing advocates for preparation of paper books, appearance in courts etc. Legal Services Institutions have appointed panel lawyers at all levels including juvenile courts

for providing above mentioned legal services'.

( c) Juveniles are kept in reformative homes on need basis and monitored by the

Juvenile Justice Board (JJB). The Ministry of Women and Child Development, the state governments, civil societies, NGOs, international multilateral

organizations etc. have been working towards resettlement of such children who have strayed from social life.



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH APRIL, 2017

TV Channel

5227 SHRI RAM CHARITRA NISHAD : SHRI ASHWINI KUMAR:

·Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether the Government is considering to launch TV Channel to spread legal awareness and if so, the details thereof;

(b) whether the channel will beam discussions and constitutional interpretation on key issues like triple talaq and the uniform civil code apart from debates on important judgement to spread legal awareness and if so, the details thereof; and

(c) whether the Government has sought a separate channel for this purpose from a bouquet of 32 direct to home channels launched by the Ministry of Human Resource Development and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF ST ATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY


(a) There is no proposal at present to launch a TV channel to spread legal awareness. The government has undertaken various initiatives for legal awareness through print and electronic media in collaboration with different Ministries like HRD, Electronics and IT, Rural Development, various State Governments, civil societies and multilateral international organizations like UNDP.

(b) Does not arise in view of (a) above.

( c) The Government has not sought a separate channel from the bouquet of 32 direct to home channels launched by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (HRD). However, preliminary discussions have been made by the Department of Justice with the Ministry of HRD to telecast their legal literacy short films, videos in one of the existing channels of Ministry of HRD currently dedicated to Law & Legal Studies.



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 5th APRIL, 2017

Holiday in Courts

+ 5250. SHRI PRATAPRAO JADHAV:


(a) whether the Government plans to discontinue the system of summer and winter vacations in the courts;


(c) the efforts made by the Government to remove that mentality in courts which is continuing since British period so that democratic system can be evolved in courts and the outcome thereof?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE & ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY


(a) to (c) : The duration of vacations is governed by the Rules/Regulations framed

by the concerned High Courts and the Supreme Court. The vacation/working

days/working hours in the District /Subordinate Courts are regulated by t~e respective

High Court and the Government has no role in it.

The Supreme Court has notified the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 on 27th May,

2014 wherein, inter-alia, it is provided that the period of summer vacation shall not

exceed seven weeks. It is further provided that the length of the summer vacation

and the number of holidays for the Court and the offices of the Court shall be such as

may be fixed by the Chief Justice and notified in the official Gazette so as not to

exceed one hundred and three days, excluding Sundays not falling in the vacation

and during Court holidays.

Government does not have under its consideration any proposal to

abolish/curtail the practice of summer vacation in the Courts.

.. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOK SABHA



Quick Dispute Resolution

5251. SHRI PARVESH SAHIB SINGH:


(a) whether the Ministry has made any suggestion to the judiciary for the sake of improving the ease of doing business in India since dispute resolution is a major factor in the same; and

(b) if so, the details regarding the same?

ANSWER MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS

AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SHRI P. P. CHAUDHARY)

(a) & (b) : Ministry of Law and Justice has recently requested Chief

Justice of India and Chief Justices of Delhi and Bombay High Courts to

provide the necessary leadership for the proper implementation of the

existing provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 relating to grant

of adjournments, adherence to timelines, electronic filing and electronic

service of summons in City Courts of Delhi and Mum~ai immediately

with a view to providing timely and effective "enforcement of contracts"

for improving the ease of doing business in India. *********



TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 5™ APRIL, 2017

Fast Track Courts

5256. SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI


(a) whether in order to expedite the justice delivery system in cases of heinous crimes against women, children and elderly the Government has earmarked fund of Rs.4100 crore to set up 1800 fast track courts across the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof; (c) the target date fixed by the Government for utilization of funds

to establish fast track courts in States; (d) whether earlier allocation made for this purpose has been

utilized by States and the number of fast track courts so far functioning at present in the country and if so, the details

thereof; (e) whether this step of the Government has been taken on the

recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission; and (f) if so, the steps taken by the Government to persuade States to

utilize the funds within timeframe? ANSWER



(a): Setting up of the Subordinate Courts including Fast Track Courts (FTCs) lies within the domain of the State Governments which in consultation with the High Courts set up such courts with their own resources. However, in order to expedite the justice delivery system for speedy disposal of cases of heinous

crimes against women, children and elderly, the Government submitted a proposal as a component of its Memorandum to the 14th Finance Commission for setting up of 1800 FTCs with an allocation of Rs. 4144 crores which has ben endorsed in totality by the finance Commission.

(b): The details thereof are given as Annexure-1.

(c) :The target date fixed by the Government for utilization of funds to establish fast track courts in States is 2015-20, i.e. the period of the 14th Finance Commission.

(d) : The number of functional fast track courts as on December 31, 2016 in the country is 524 and the State-wise breakup is given as Annexure-11.

(e) & (f): The 14th Finance Commission noted that the proposal of the Government was arrived at after an extensive consultation process with the States and merited favorable consideration. Consequently, the 14th FC endorsed the proposal to incur expenditure of Rs.4144 crore on 1800 FTCs for a period of five years (2015-20) and urged the State Governments to use the additional fiscal space provided by the Commission in the tax devolution from 32% to 42% to meet such requirements.

The Hon'ble Prime Minister vide his letter dated 23rd April, 2015 has urged the State Governments to allocate funds for the activities mentioned in the 14th FC recommendations from their State budget from 2015-16 onwards. This issue was also discussed in the CM/CJ Conference on 05th April, 2015 and 24th April, 2016 wherein it was resolved to strengthen the existing coordination and monitoring mechanism between the State Government and the Judiciary for effective implementation of the recommendations of the 14th FC. The Minister of Law and Justice has further urged all the Chief Ministers of the States and Chief Justices of High Courts to implement the resolution of the Conference vide letters dated 03rd June, 2015 and 26th September, 2016.

*****

--- - --------------------------------------------

, ANNEXURE-1

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) and Cb) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.5256 TO BE ANSWERED ON 05TH APRIL, 2017

Funds earmarked for establishment of 1800 Fast Track Courts for a period of five years (2015-2020) as endorsed by the 141

h Finance Commission.

(Rs. in crore) S.No Name of the State Funds earmarked/released

I. Andhra Pradesh 108.21 2. Telangana 85.18 3. Assam 82.88 4. Arunachal Pradesh 0.00 5. Mizoram 16.12 6. Nagaland 6.91 7. Bihar 338.43 8. Chhattisgarh 64.46 9. Gujarat 400.59 10. Himachal Pradesh 29.93 11. Jammu & Kashmir 48.35 12. Jharkhand 115.11 13. Kamataka 218.72 14. Kerala, Lakshadweep 94.39 15. Madhya Pradesh 306.20 16. Maharashtra, D&N, Daman & Diu 469.67 17. Goa 11.51 18. Manipur 6.91 19. Me!!halaya 9.21 20. Orissa 145.04 21. Punjab 115.11 22. Chandigarh 4.61

Harvana 110.51 23. Rajasthan 214.11 24. Sikkim 2.3 25. Tamil Nadu, Puducherry 204.91 26. Tripura 20.72 27. Uttar Pradesh 488.08 28. Uttarakhand 64.46 29. West Bengal, A&N Islands 216.42 30. Delhi 145.05

Total 4144.11

• ANNEXURE-II

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PART (a) to (d) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 5256 TO BE REPLIED ON 05 TH APRIL, 2017 REGARDING FAST TRACK COURTS.

S.No State No. of FTC functional

1 Andhra Pradesh 38 2 Arunachal Pradesh -3 Assam 3 4 Bihar 0 5 Chhattisgarh 14 6 Delhi 13 7 Goa 5 8 Gujarat 0 9 Haryana 0 10 Himachal Pradesh 0 11 Jammu & Kashmir -12 Jharkhand 12 13 Karnataka 0 14 Kera la 0 15 Madhya Pradesh 0 16 Maharashtra 100 17 Manipur -18 Meghalaya 0 19 Mizoram -20 Nagaland -21 Odis ha 0 22 Punjab 0 23 Puducherry -24 Rajasthan 0 25 Sikkim 1 26 Tamil Nadu 39 27 Telangana 34 28 Tripura 1

29 Uttar Pradesh 183 30 Uttarakhand 4 31 West Bengal 77

Total 524



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, 12TH APRIL, 2017

All India Judicial Service

*553. SHRI HARINDER SINGH KHALSA: SHRIMATI KOTHAPALLI GEETHA:


(a) the present status of the All India Judicial Service for the lower judiciary; (b) the details of various views given by the State Governments and courts on the

issue; (c) whether the Government has finalised the consultative process in this regard

and if so, the details thereof; and (d) the measures taken by the Government to overcome the objections raised by

the different High Courts in this regard?

ANSWER



(a) to (d): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

..

·STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (d) of LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. *553 FOR ANSWER ON 12tff APRIL, 2017.

(a) to (d) : A comprehensive proposal was formulated for the constitution of an All India

Judicial Service (AIJS) and the same was approved by the Committee of Secretaries in

November, 2012. The proposal was included as an agenda item in the Conference of

Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of the High Courts held in April, 2013 and it was

decided that issue needs further deliberation and consideration. The views of the State

Governments and High Courts were sought on the proposal. There was divergence of

opinion among the State Governments and among the High Courts on the constitution

of All India Judicial Service. While some State Governments and High Courts were not

·in favour of creation of All India Judicial Service, some other State Governments and

High Courts wanted changes in the proposal formulated by the Central Government.

Only High Courts of Sikkim and Tripura have concurred with the proposal

approved by Committee of Secretaries for formation of All India Judicial Service. High

Courts of Allahabad, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Manipur, Meghalaya,

Orissa and Uttarakhand have suggested changes in age at induction level,

qualifications, training and quota of vacancies to be filled through All India Judicial

Service. Rest of the High Courts have not favoured the idea. Most of the High Courts

want the administrative control over the Subordinate Judiciary to remain with the

. respective High Courts. The High Courts of Jharkhand and Rajasthan have indicated

that the matter regarding creation of AIJS is pending consideration. No response has

been received from the High Courts of Calcutta, Jammu & Kashmir and Gauhati.

The State Governments of Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka,

Madhya Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Punjab do not favour the formation of

AIJS. The State Government of Maharashtra wants the recruitment to be done at

Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) level which is not in consonance with the

provisions of AIJS included in the Constitution of India. The State Government of Bihar,

Chhattisgarh, Manipur, Orissa and Uttarakhand want changes in the proposal

formulated by the Central Government. The State Government of Haryana has stated

that the proposal seems to be justified. The State Government of Mizoram supported

creation of AIJS on the lines of IA$, IPS and other Central Services. The State of

Jammu and Kashmir has mentioned that provisions of Constitution of India for formation

of AIJS incorporated in the Constitution by 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 are not

applicable to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. No response has yet been received

from rest of the States.

The proposal for constitution of All India Judicial Service with views from the High

Courts and State Governments received thereon was included in the agenda· for the

Joint Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of the High Courts held on 05th

April, 2015. However, no progress was made on the subject. The matter regarding

creation of a Judicial Service Commission to help the recruitment to the post of district -

·judges and review of selection process of judges I judicial officers at all level was also

included in the agenda for the Chief Justices Conference, which was held on 03rd and

04th April, 2015, wherein it was resolved to leave it open to the respective High Courts

to evolve appropriate methods within the existing system to fill up the vacancies for

appointment of District judges expeditiously.

However, keeping in view the divergence of opinion among the stakeholders on

constitution of All India Judicial Service, the Government has undertaken the

consultative process to arrive at a common ground. The All India Judicial Service,

however is a laudable idea, which will help bring in fresh talent in the process of judicial

, appointment and will also give opportunity for representation of deserving candidates

from the inadequately represented community in the higher judiciary.

************ '

..



LOK SABHA

UNST ARRED QUESTION NO. t6239


Infrastructure in Consumer Courts

t6239. Shri Devji M. Patel:


(a) whether there is heavy shortage of space, building, staff and other facilities in consumer courts of the country, State-wise including Rajasthan;

(b) if so, the details of vacant posts, State-wise; (c) the steps taken to appoint staff on vacant posts and improve working

conditions of the staff; and (d) the steps taken by the Government for proper and full implementation of

consumer protection act in the country including Rajasthan?

ANSWER



(a) & (b): As per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, it is the

responsibility of the State Government I UTs to establish consumer fora in the States I

UTs by building infrastructure and providing manpower. However, the Central

Government provides financial assistance to the States I UT s for building infrastructure.

As regards National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), Central

·Government provides the building infrastructure, manpower etc. There are two

vacancies and five anticipated vacancies to the posts of Members in NCDRC. The

details of vacant posts in the Consumer fora are given in a Statement at Annexure.

There is no pending proposal for grant of funds in respect of the State of Rajasthan.

During the 1zth plan period, a sum of Rs.740.04 lakh and Rs.68.86 lakh have been

released under the Scheme "Strengthening of Consumer Fora Phase II" and "State

Consumer Helpline" respectively.

(c): The State Governments I UTs are liable to fill up the vacancies of staff and

members of the State Commissions and District Fora. They are advised from time to

time to fill up the vacancies.

(d) : Financial assistance are given to the State Governments I UTs for building

infrastructure etc. Regional and National Conferences are held from time to time to

sensitize the State Governments I UTs to implement the provisions of the Consumer

Protection Act, 1986 effectively. Financial assistance is also provided to set up and run

State Consumer Helpline to aid and advise the consumers so as to avail of the

consumer grievance redressal mechanism. The National Consumer Helpline has been

strengthened to allow more consumers to lodge their grievances on line.

**********

Annexure

Statement referred to Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 6239 for reply on 12.04.2017 V P "f . N f I C Stat C d o· t . t F acancv os1 ion m a1ona omm1ss1on, e omm1ss1on an 1s r1c ora

Sanctioned Strenath Vacanc· / Status National Commission President Member President Member

1 11 0 2

. Sr. State Commission

State Sanctioned Strenath Vacanc / Status No.

President Member President Member 1. Assam 1 2 0 0 2. Andhra Pradesh 1 2 0 2 3. ArunachalPradesh 1 2 0 0 4. A& N Island 1 2 0 0 5. Bihar 1 2 0 0 6. Chandiaarh 1 2 0 0 7. Chhattishgarh 1 2 0 0 8. Daman & Diu 0 0 0 0 9. Dadra & Nagar Haveli 1 2 0 0 10. Delhi 1 4 0 0 11. Goa 1 2 0 0 12. Gujarat 1 5 0 0 13. Harvana 1 4 0 0

. 14. Himachal Pradesh 1 2 0 0 15. Jammu & Kashmir 1 2 0 0 16. Jharkhand 1 2 0 0 17. Karnataka 1 2 0 0 18. Kera la 1 4 0 0 19. Lakshadweeo 1 2 0 1 20. Madhya Pradesh 1 3 0 1 21. Maharashtra 1 11 0 0 22. Manipur 1 2 0 0 23. Meghalaya 1 2 0 0 24. Mizoram 1 2 0 1 25. Naaaland 1 2 0 0 26. Odis ha 1 2 0 0 27. Puducherrv 1 2 0 0 28. Punjab 1 7 1 0

. 29. Rajasthan 1 10 0 4 30. Sikkim 1 2 0 0 31. Tamil Nadu 1 4 0 2 32 Telangana 1 2 0 1 33. Tripura 1 2 0 0 34. Uttar Pradesh 1 10 0 0 35. Uttarakhand 1 2 0 0 36. West Bengal 1 6 0 0

Total 35 116 1 12 Continued .... 2/-

... 2 ...

Sr. District Fora

State Sanctioned Strength Vacancy Status No. President Member President Member

1. Assam 23 46 3 8 2. Andhra Pradesh 17 34 2 26 3. ArunachalPradesh 18 36 0 11 4. A & N Island 1 2 0 0

y 5. Bihar 38 76 0 21 6. ChandiQarh 2 4 0 0 7. Chhattishgarh 12 54 1 9 8. Daman & Diu 2 4 0 2 9. Dadra & Nagar Haveli 1 2 0 2

10. Delhi 10 20 2 5 11. Goa 2 4 0 0 12. Gujarat 26 52 6 4 13. Haryana 21 42 - 0 7 14. Himachal Pradesh 4 24 0 11 15. Jammu & Kashmir 2 4 0 0 16. Jharkhand 22 44 1 8 17. Karnataka 31 62 4 16 18. Kera la 14 26 1 1 19. Lakshadweep 1 2 0 1

. 20. Madhya Pradesh 24 108 0 44 21. Maharashtra 40 80 8 8 22. Manipur 3 6 0 0 23. Meg ha la ya 7 14 0 2 24. Mizoram 8 16 0 3 25. NaQaland 11 22 0 15 26. Odisha 31 62 0 0 27. Puducherry 1 2 0 0

-28. Punjab 20 40 9 11 29. Rajasthan 37 74 10 18 30. Sikkim 4 8 0 0 31. Tamil Nadu 25 60 11 12 32 Telangana 12 24 10 20 33. Tripura 4 8 0 0 34. Uttar Pradesh 79 158 9 15

. 35. Uttarakhand 13 26 0 3 36. West Bengal 21 42 2 7

Total 587 1288 79 290 ***************



LOK SABHA



Separation of Executive and Legislature

6251 SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI:


(a) whether the Government is working on a plan to keep judiciary away from executive by reducing post retirement posts for judges;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor;

(c) whether the Government has asked expert bodies to suggest names for different panels;

(d) if so, the details thereof;

(e) whether the Government is also going to reduce the number of tribunals;

(f) if so, whether any consultation in this regard has been made with Law Commission of India;

and

(g) if so, the time by which a final decision is likely to be taken in this regard?

ANSWER



(a)to(g) The Government constituted one Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG) under the chairmanship

of the Law Secretary to recommend, inter-alia, on the issue relating to convergence/merger of

tribunals as recommended in a study undertaken by the Indian Law Institute. The IMG after

series of deliberations recommended for merger of some tribunals in a phased manner based

on workload and similarity in functions. Some recommendations of the IMG were accepted by

the Government and provisions have already been made in the Finance Act, 2017 for merger of

seventeen tribunals, Appellate Tribunals and other Authorities to reduce them to eight.

***************

GO~ERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 12™APRIL, 2017

Fast Track Courts

6256. SHRI RAJESH PANDEY:


(a) whether the working of Fast Track Courts dealing with rape

cases are not upto the desired level;

(b) if so, the number of cases pending in these courts in each State

as on date; and

(c) the number of courts set-up/designated for cases of crimes

against women and special courts established under POCSO Act, 2012

for cases of crimes against children?

ANSWER



(a) to (b): Setting up of the Subordinate Courts which include Fast Track

Courts (FTCs)/Special Courts lies within the domain of the State

Governments which in consultation with the High Courts may set up such

courts. The Government of India proposed· setting up of 1800 FTCs as a

component of its Memorandum to the 14th Finance Commission to dispose

of cases pertaining to heinous crimes including those of rape. The 14th

Finance Commission while noting that the proposal of the Government

was arrived at after an extensive consultation process with the States,

endorsed the proposal of the Government for incurring Rs.4144 crore and

setting up of additional 1800 FTCs for a period of five years (2015-20). The

14th FC further advised the State Governments to use the additional fiscal

space provided by the Commission in the :tax., devolution to meet such

requirements.

The Hon'ble Prime Minister vide his letter dated 23n1 April, 2015 has

urged the State Governments to allocate funds for the activities mentioned

in the 14th FC recommendations from their State budget from 2015-16

onwards. This issue was also discussed in the Conferences of the Chief

Ministers of the State Governments and Chief Justices of the High Courts

held on 05th April, 2015 and 24th April, 2016 respectively wherein it was

resolved to strengthen the existing coordination and monitoring

mechanism between the State Government and the Judiciary for effective

implementation of the recommendations of the 14th FC. The Minister of

Law and Justice has further urged all the Chief Ministers of the States and

Chief Justices of High Courts to implement the resolution of the

Conference vide letters dated 03rd June, 2015 and 26th September, 2016.

The data in respect of number of cases pending in these FTCs in

each State as on date is not maintained centrally. However, as per the

information made available by the respective States, the number of cases

pending in these FTCs which inter alia include cases of rape is annexed as

Annexure-1.

(c): Section 28(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,

2012 provides that for the purposes of providing a speedy trial, the State

Government shall in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court,

by notification in the Official Gazette, designate for each district, a Court

of Session to be a Special Court to try the offences under the Act provided

that if a Court of Session is notified as a Children's Court under the

Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 or a Special Court

designated for similar purposes under any other law for the time being in

force, then, such court shall be deemed to be a Special Court under this

section. As per these provisions, It is for the State Government to set

up/designate the Special Courts. As per information available, number of

Courts so set-up/designated for cases of crimes against women/crime

against children under POCSO Act, 2012 is enclosed as Annexure-11.

****

ANNEXURE-1

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) & (b) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.6256 TO BE ANSWERED ON 12TH APRIL, 2017 REGARDING FAST TRACK COURTS.

S.No State Cases Pending as on

1 Andhra Pradesh 6778 as on March 31, 2016 2 ArunachatPradesh -3 Assam 5769 as on December, 12, 2015 4 Bihar -5 Chhatttsgarh 296613 on June 30, 1016 6 Delhi 658 as on July 31, 2016 7 Goa 2521 as on August 31, 2016

8 Gujarat -9 Haryana 1553 as on December 31, 105 10 Himachat Pradesh -11 Jammu & Kashmir -12 Jharkhand 2200 as on December, 31, 2015 13 Karnataka 14 Kera la 3692 as on December, 31, 2015 15 Madhya Pradesh -16 Maharashtra -17 Manipur -18 Meghataya 202 as on January 31, 2011 19 Mizoram -20 Nagatand -21 Odis ha 22 Punjab 1292 as on January 31, 2016 23 Puducherry -24 Rajasthan 25 Sikkim 4 as on March 31, 2016 26 Tamil Nadu -27 Telangana 6602 as on March 31, 2016 28 Tripura 1751 as on December 31, 2015

29 Uttar Pradesh 41001 December 31, 2015 30 Uttarakhand 161 as on May 31, 2016 31 West Bengal 33510 as on July 31, 2016

Annexure-11

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PART (c) OF LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.6256 TO BE ANSWERED ON 12TH APRIL, 2017 REGARDING FAST TRACK COURTS.

Special Courts set·upfdeslgnated for .cases of crimes against women and for cases of

crimes against children under POCSO Act, 2012

S.No. Name of the State/UT Number of Courts for cases of

Crimes against Crimes against women children under

POCSO Act, 2012

1 Andhra PradeshfTelangana 24 23 2 ArunachalPradesh * \ 5 3 Assam 3 27 4 Bihar * 38 5 Chhattisgarh 16 16

6 Chandigarh 1 * 7 Goa * 1 8 Gujarat * 33 9 Haryana 21 21 10 Himachal Pradesh * 12 11 Jammu & Kashmir 5 * 12 Jharkhand 11 24 13 Kamataka 10 30 14 Kerala 1 14 15 Maharashtra 27 33 16 Meghalaya 1 4 17 Manipur * 9 18 Madhya Pradesh 50 50 19 Mlzoram * 2 20 Nagaland * 11

21 Odis ha 30 30

22 Punjab 20 22

23 Rajasthan 9 33 24 Sikkim 1 4 25 Tamil Nadu 32 32 26 Tripura 2 8 27 Uttarakhand * 13 28 Uttar Pradesh 80 75 29 West Bengal 48 20 30 Andaman &Nicobar * 1 31 Chandigarh * 1 32 Daman and Diu * * 33 Delhi 6 11 34 Dadar & Magar Haveli * 1 35 Lakshadweep * 1

36 Pondicherry * * Total 398 605

*Not available

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW ANO JUSTICE


LOK SABHA



Access to Justice Project

6258 SHRI RAM CHARITRA NISHAD:


(a) whether the access to justice project is being implemented in many parts of the country and if so, the details thereof;

(b) whether the objectives of the project are to address the legal needs of the marginalized and vulnerable sections of society, particularly women, children and scheduled castes and tribal communities and if so, the details thereof;

( c) whether it also aims at improving the justice delivery systems to serve the people better; and

(d) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER



(a) The Government is implementing two projects on Access to Justice, one in

partnership with UNDP being implemented in 8 States namely, Bihar, Rajasthan,

Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Odisha.

The other project is being implemented in 9 States of North East and Jammu &

Kashmir.

(b) The focus of the two projects is on empowering the poor and marginalized to

be aware of their rights and demand legal services, while at the same time supporting

national and local justice delivery institutions to bring justice to the poor as mentioned

in Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The details of the

projectsinclude setting up of legal aid clinics in law schools, action research on

access to justice issues, training and capacity building programmes of paralegal

volunteers, lawyers, grassroots level workers, technology for increasing access to

justice like providing voice based legal information kiosks etc.

(c)&(d)Under the Government of India and UNDP Project on Access to Justice for

marginalized, a team of five experts has been providing technical support to the _.,

National Mission on Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms since 2012. The technical

team focuses on research and providing technical inputs for the work undertaken by the

National Mission on Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms. The team provides technical

assistance on areas such as identifying areas which are prone to excessive litigation,

re-engineering of court procedures, alternative dispute resolution mechanism and steps

to be taken to reduce pendency in courtsetc

****************



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 12th APRIL, 2017

Regional Languages in Courts

6273 SHRIMATI DARSHANA VIKRAM JARDOSH:


(a) the number of High Courts of various States which are permitted to use regional languages in the judicial proceedings;

(b) the number of requests from various State Governments pending for approval to use regional languages in their respective High Courts;

(c) whether Central Government would consider the request of Gujarat and approach the Supreme Court afresh to review their earlier stand to allow use of Gujarati language in judicial proceedings of High Court of Gujarat; and

(d) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER



(a) to (d) : In terms of the provisions under Article 348 (2) of the Constitution and

Section 7 of the Official Language Act, 1963, use of regional language i.e. Hindi has

been authorised in the proceedings of four States namely Rajasthan, Madhya

Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

The proposals of State Governments of West Bengal, Tamilnadu, Gujarat,

Chhattishgarh and Karnataka requesting use of Bengali, Tamil, Gujarati, Hindi and

Contd .... p.2/-

-2-

Kannada languages in their respective High Courts were not favoured by the Full

Court of the Supreme Court.

As per the Cabinet decision dated 21.05.1965, the views of Hon'ble the

Chief Justice of India are obtained whenever proposals for use of Hindi/Regional

Languages in the High Courts are received from the State Governments.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

, .

)





Paperless Judiciary

6326. SHRI BHEEMRAO B. PATIL

Will the MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether the Supreme Court has decided to go paperless; (b) if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor; (c) whether it has also decided to make available all records

electronically and fore-filing of cases; (d) whether the court has initiated the process of digitisation of

old records ; and (e) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER MINISTER OF STATE FOR LAW AND JUSTICE AND ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(Shri P.P. Chaudhary)

(a) and (b): Yes. The process of computerisation has started long

back in the Supreme Court of India. On 12th May, 2012, the Case

Information System was introduced. Now initiatives are further

being taken to make it paperless Court. E-office Software Is being

experimented for administrative and other purposes. To expedite

the judicial proceedings and to further reduce pendency and delay

in justice delivery system as well as with a view to offer better and

speedy judicial services to all stake holders of judiciary viz., Bench,

Bar and Litigants including Government organisations, an ICT

initiative has been taken to implement Integrated Case

Management Information System (ICMIS) at Supreme Court in a

phased manner which leads to paperless environment in future.

ICMIS to be implemented at Supreme Coulrwm integrate with .. Case Information system of all High Courts and ·Subordinate Courts

in a phased manner for exchange of judicial information and record.

Through ICMIS all cases filed including e·filing and its

corresponding records will be digitized and made available to

concerned parties. All stake holders viz. Advocates Central

Government Departments, State Government Departments, Judicial

Officers, High Courts, Police Stations, Jail Authorities etc. will be

provided with login and passwords for monitoring case and its

corresponding records related to them to complete action

anticipated from them.

(c), (d) and (e): Yes. Till date the case records of Civil and Criminal

Appeals for the years 1950-2010 have been digitized.



LOK SABHA



Efficient Work Culture

6337. SHRI MALYADRI SRIRAM:


(a) whether the Government would come forward to bring in more efficient work culture in the entire judicial system along with adequate appointment of judges for trial of such long pending cases; and

(b) if so, the details thereof and the action taken by the Government in this

regard?

ANSWER



(a) & (b) : Appointment of Judges I Judicial officers and their service conditions in

Districts and Subordinate Courts is within the domain of the State Governments and the

High Courts concerned. The Central Government has no role in the matter. However,

the Central Government takes up the matter with the High Courts from time to time to fill


Disposal of cases pending in courts is within the domain of Judiciary. The

Government has adopted a co-ordinated approach · to assist judiciary for phased


infrastructure for courts including computerisation, increase in strength of judicial

officers I judges, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive


During the Joint Conference of Chief Ministers of States and Chief Justices of the

High Courts held at New Delhi in· April 2015, reduction of pendency and backlog of

cases in courts emerged as an area which required focused attention at the High Court

level. The Chief Justices of the High Courts in the Conference held on 03rd and 04th

·April 2015 have resolved that each High Court shall establish an Arrears Committee,

which would go into the factors responsible for the delays and prepare an action plan to

clear the backJog of cases pending for more than five years. It was further resolved in

the Conference of Chief Justices of the High Courts held in April, 2016, that in order to

ensure expeditious disposal of cases pertaining to women, marginalized segments,

senior citizens and differently-abled, steps be taken to (a) prioritize the disposal of

cases falling in these categories within the existing court system; (b) an endeavour be

made to revisit the cadre strength of subordinate courts and, where necessary, create

additional courts to deal with such cases. As per information available, Arrears

Committees have been set up by the High Courts.

************

/ / •



LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. t6343


Requirement of Session Courts

t6343. SHRI KAMALBHAN SINGH MARABI:


(a) the number of district and other courts in the country, State-wise; (b) whether with the constitution of new States there is shortage of session

courts and notaries therein and if so, the number of new session courts required to be established and number of Notaries needed to be increased to tide over the shortfall;

(c) the district-wise details of number of Notaries in the Chhattisgarh State; (d) whether the Government of Chhattisgarh has requested to increase the

number of Notaries; and (e) if so, the district-wise details thereof and the steps taken by the Government

in this regard?

ANSWER



(a) to (e) : The District and Subordinate Courts are set up by the State Governments in

consultation with concerned High Courts. Hence, State I UT-wise list of District and

Subordinate Courts are not maintained centrally. However, as per the information

available, State-wise details of sanctioned and working strength of Judges I Judicial

Officers in District and Subordinate Courts as on 30.09.2016 are given in the Statement

at Annexure - I.

Continued .... 2/-

•

... 2 ...

As per Schedule attached to the Notaries Rules, maximum number of Notaries to

be appointed by the Central Government is 400. On the request made by the State of

Chhattisgarh, Government has vide Notification G.S.R.429 (E) dated 18.04.2016

increased maximum number of Notaries to be appointed by the State Government from

600 to 1350. Government does not maintain the district-wise details of number of

. Notaries in the Chhattisgarh State.

***************

Annexure -1 Statement referred to Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 6343 for reply on

12.04.2017 Details of Sanctioned and Work.ing Strength of Judges I Judicial Officers of

District and Subordinate Courts as on 30.09.2016* Sr. Name of the State I UT Total Sanctioned Total Working No. Strength Strength 1. Uttar Pradesh 2262 1674 2. Andhra Pradesh & 975 798

Telangana 3(a) Mahrashtra 2257 2248 3(b) Goa 57 46 3(c) Diu and Daman 7 6 3(d) Silvasa 4(a) West Bengal 1013 885 4(b) Andaman & Nicobar

5. Chhattisgarh 395 334 6. Delhi 793 491 7. Gujarat 1953 1133

8(a) Assam 424 314 8(b) Nagaland 34 25 8(c) Mizoram 63 30 8(d) Arunachal Pradesh 26 17 9. Himachal Pradesh 155 145 10. Jammu & Kashmir 246 219 11. Jharkhand 671 454 12. Karnataka 1299 923

13(a) Kera la 470 415 13(b) Lakshadweep 3 3 14. Madhya Pradesh 1461 1233 15. Manipur 41 34 16. Meghalaya 57 41

17(a) Tamil Nadu 1038 948 17(b) Puducherry 26 14 18. Orissa 863 606 19. Bihar 1825 1016

20(a) Punjab 674 548 20(b) Harvana 644 505 20(c) Chandigarh 30 30 21. Rajasthan 1203 1081 22. Sikkim 18 14 23. Tripura 106 78 24. Uttarakhand 285 220

Total 21374 16528 *Court News (July-September, 2016) of Supreme Court

************

\



LOK SABHA



Aid to Acid Attack victims

6400 SHRIMATI KOTHAPALLI GEETHA:


(a) whether NALSA is helping the acid attack victims and if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor;

(b) whether cases of victims of acid attacks would be taken on a priority basis by framing a special scheme for them and if so, the details and the present status thereof; and

(c) if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER



(a)to(c)The National Legal Services Authority has launched a scheme on 9.11.2016,

titled "NALSA (Legal Services to Victims of Acid Attacks) Scheme, 2016 to provide

legal services to the victims of acid attacks. All victims of acid attacks are being

provided legal aid and financial assistance on a priority basis under the "Victim

Compensation Scheme" so that they are rehabilitated in the society and live a life of

dignity. The main objectives of the scheme are as follows:-

(i) To strengthen legal aid and representation at the national, state, district and

taluka levels for victims of acid attacks in availing the benefits of the various legal

provisions and schemes for compensation which exist, including Victim

Compensation Scheme of all States.

(ii) To enable the victims of acid attacks to get access to medical facilities and

rehabilitative services;

(iii) To create and spread awareness about the entitlements of the victims of acid

attacks through the District Legal Services Authorities, Taluka Legal Services

Committees, panel lawyers, para-legal volunteers and legal services clinics;

(iv) To enhance capacities at all levels of panel lawyers, para-legal volunteers in

legal services clinics, government officers tasked with the implementation of the various

schemes, service providers, police personnel, non-governmental organizations by

organizing training,· orientation and sensitization programmes, and

(v) To undertake research and documentation to study the various schemes, laws,

etc., to find out the gaps, the needs and to make suggestions to the appropriate

authorities.

****************

..





Regional Benches of SC

6424. SHRIMATI DARSHANA VIKRAM JARDOSH:


(a) whether Government is aware that lakhs of litigants have to travel to New Delhi from extreme comers of this vast country to appear in Supreme Court to appeal against orders/judgments of the State High Courts;

(b) if so, whether in view of various representations, the Law Commission's recommendation and in the interest of common man of the country, Government would initiate fresh efforts, in consultation with the Supreme Court to establish Benches of Supreme Court in four regions of the country; and

( c) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER




(a) : Yes, Madam.

(b) to ( c) : According to Article 13 0 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places as the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President,

from time to time, appoint.

... 2/-

-2-

Representations have been received from time to time from various quarters for establishment of Benches of Supreme Court in various parts of the country. The Law Commission, in its 229th Report had also suggested that a Constitutional Bench be set up at Delhi

and four Cassation Benches be set up in the Northern region at Delhi, the Southern region at Chennai/Hyderabad, the Eastern region at Kolkata and the Western region at Mumbai.

The matter was referred to the Chief Justice of India, who has informed that after consideration of the matter, the Full Court in its meeting held on 181h February, 2010, found no justification for setting up of benches of the Supreme Court outside Delhi.

There is a Writ Petition (Civil) No.36 of 2016 filed in the Supreme Court on the subject of establishment of National Court of Appeal and the matter is sub-judice.

***



LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 6427 TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 12th APRIL, 2017

Working of Courts during Vacation

6427. DR. BOORA NARSAIAH GOUD


(a) whether the Chief Justice of India (CJI) has made an appeal for the judiciary to work during summer breaks;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the reaction of the Government thereto;

(c) whether any consultation has been held with various High Courts regarding the same; and

(d) if so, the details and the outcome thereof?

ANSWER



(a)to (d) The Chief Justice of India (CJI) has written a letter dated April

06, 2017 to the Chief Justices of all the High Courts requesting them

to volunteer working for a few days during the vacation to ensure

expeditious disposal of cases and "Access to Justice" to all.

In this regard, no consultation has been held with the High Courts to work during summer breaks, as no consultation is required.

Documents

INDEX [doj.gov.in] · Question No. 2189 Unstarred 15.03.2017 All India Judicial Service National Mission 10. Question No. 2221 Unstarred 15.03.2017 Pending Cases of Accident ... Under