Establishment Of Gram Nyayalayas: SC Again Seeks Affidavits From States/UTs, Warns Chief Secretaries Of Action In Case Of Failure To Furnish Data

In a PIL seeking establishment and effectuation of Gram Nyayalayas in the country, the Supreme Court recently again called on states/Union Territories to furnish affidavits and warned that if the same are not filed, the Court would be constrained to take serious view of the matter as well as take action (as deemed appropriate) against the concerned Chief Secretaries.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan passed the order, directing the Chief Secretaries of all states/Union Territories to file the affidavits (supplying information as sought in the order) within 12 weeks. The states which had not filed affidavits in response to the court's last order shall also include information which was sought earlier, the order said.

"In the event of failure of any state/UT, we shall be constrained to take serious view of the matter and take such action as deemed appropriate against the concerned Chief Secretary", the Court warned. It was further clarified that the information sought shall be given by respective states/UTs only after consulting Registrar Generals of High Courts.

The hearing witnessed Senior Advocate Nidhesh Gupta (acting as Amicus Curiae) apprise the Court that after its last order, some states/UTs had filed their affidavits but others had not. Referring to a chart that he had prepared, the senior counsel urged that the stand of the states/UTs could be divided into following 3 categories:

(i) Those which stated that the 2008 Act is not mandatory for them, and, therefore, there is no necessity for them to constitute a Gram Nyayalaya;

(ii) Those which stated that though the Act is applicable to them, in view of the existing infrastructure available in the said State/UT, it is not necessary for them to establish the Gram Nyayalayas;

(iii) Those which stated that as per the Act, they have established the Gram Nyayalayas.

In addition, Gupta produced a questionnaire (prepared alongwith Advocate Suhasini Sen) in terms whereof all states/UTs have now been asked to furnish data. The questionnaire included the following aspects:

1. Total number of Districts in the State

2. In terms of Section 3(1) of the Act, the total number of:

i. Intermediate Panchayats/group of contiguous Panchayats at the intermediate level in each district as applicable

ii. Groups of contiguous Gram Panchayats where there is no Panchayat at the intermediate level

3. Number of Judicial Magistrate of First Class (JMFCs) currently serving in each district

4. Number of Civil Judges (Junior Division) currently serving in each district

5. Data concerning pending cases:

a. Total number of pending cases before each JMFC

b. Total number of pending cases before Civil Judge (Junior Division)

c. Of the aforesaid pending cases in (a) and (b) above, how many will fall within the jurisdiction of Sections 12 and13 of the Act.

d. How many appeals are pending before the Court of Sessions and the District Court which fall within the scope of Sections 33 and 34 of the Act?

e. How many civil and criminal cases are pending before each High Court under different statutory provisions which would not have been required to be adjudicated had the said cases been instituted under the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 in view of Sections 33(7) and 34(6) of the Act?

6. Pecuniary limits of each Gram Nyayalaya specified by the High Court, in consultation with the State Government by notification under Section 13(2) of the Act?

7. District-wise Judge to Population Ratio of the State

8. Qualifications for appointment as JMFC in each State (in view of Section 6 of the Act)

9. (a) Existence of similar State Legislation and the qualifications, jurisdiction, powers and pendency (civil and criminal) of such Courts.

(b) Whether the aforesaid legislation is in exercise of matters enumerated in List II or List III of the 7th Schedule to the Constitution of India and the Entry thereof.

(c) If the answer to (b) above is List III, then whether the said legislation has received Presidential Assent?

Case Title: NATIONAL FEDERATION OF SOCIETIES FOR FAST JUSTICE AND ANR. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 1067/2019