Supreme Court Seeks Status Report From States & HCs On Establishment Of Gram Nyayalayas

During the last hearing, the court had impleaded all the High Courts and the State governments in the country, noting that their presence was necessary for adjudicating the matter.

Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, submitted before the court that "in their reply, some of the States have submitted that they have an alternative system. But the law takes care of that because it uses the term 'Notwithstanding, any other system in place'. It only excludes a few areas such as the North-East and the tribal areas."

The bench was hearing a PIL filed by National Federation of Societies for Fast Justice seeking the implementation of the Gram Nyayalayas Act. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, had submitted that though the Act was passed almost 14 years ago, many States have not even established even a single Gram Nyayalayas.

The Union Government has taken a stand that the establishment of Gram Nyayalayas by the States is not mandatory as the Act uses the word "may" instead of "shall", Bhushan informed the bench. He argued that the Court has interpreted "may" to mean "shall" in certain situations. Since access to justice is a fundamental right, "may" should be interpreted as "shall" in the context of Gram Nyayalayas, he argued.

The bench had then decided to add High Courts as parties in the case. The bench had also observed that it will direct States like UP, which have established the village courts, to file an affidavit sharing their experiences.

Case Title: National Federation of Societies for Fast Justice And Anr. v. UoI And Ors. WP(C) No. 1067/2019 PIL

Click Here To Read/Download Order