Boostrapping : CT.04 - Jury Trials in Quasi-Courts
Main Page     Feedback?

Proposed administrative procedure - CT.04
Jury   Trial   in   Quasi-Courts

Purpose : To reduce nexusproness in quasi-courts

Pre-requisite reading : Why Jury System is superior than judge system

  1. Background
  2. Existing procedures in quasi-courts
  3. Flaws in the today's procedure
  4. Proposed improvement : CT.04
  5. Advantages of CT.04
  6. Draft of the act to create procedure CT.04


The purpose is to bring India's administration/courts at par with West. How? By improving record keeping in GoI-offices and reducing nexuses in GoI-offices and courts. How? We would need several laws to achieve that.

CT.04 is one of these proposed laws. (to see the list of some of the laws, please click here). The proposed law CT.01 creates a LESS nexusprone way to take decisions in quasi-courts.

Existing scenaro in the quasi-courts

Many courts (or rather quasi-courts) come directly under the Executive eg. Executive Magistrate’s Court, Collector’s court, SSRD, Revenue Tribunals etc. In these courts, the judge is a government officer appointed by Ministers. This officer is so called "quasi-judicial" authority. He has limited power to impose short prison sentences and small fines, but his decisions can be challenged in a judicial court, where judges are appointed by the chief judge of the high court. The officers in these quasi-judicial courts are appointed for a term of 3-4 years.

Problem in the today's procedure

Since same officer is there for so many years, the lawyers and other professionals who frequently meet these officers are often able to form a nexus with the officer. Also, in many such courts, the retired government officers are also allowed to practice as lawyer (representative). These retired officers are former colleagues of the officers who are to issue verdicts. No wonder, why nexuses are more than rampant in such quasi-judicial courts.

Proposed improvement - CT.04 : Jury System in Quasi Courts

  1. In each quasi-court, the in-charge will select and summon 30 citizens at random from the District, and form a Grand Jury. Each Grand Juror will have a term of three months. So every month, 1/3rd will retire.

  2. Any case that comes before the quasi-court, the Grand Jurors will decide if the case requires a detailed hearing. If over 15 decide that the case requires a detailed hearing, the in-charge will summon 12 citizens from the district at random to form a Jury.

  3. The Jurors would decide the acquital/punishment after hearing both the sides. The person would be punished ONLY if over 8 Jurors approve a punishment.

Advantages of CT.04

  1. It is less prone to quasi_judge-lawyer nexuses. Say a lawyer handles 8 cases a month or say 100 cases a year or 400 cases in 4-5 years. In the present system, where one officer presides for 3-5 years, the lawyer to bribe or form nexus with only one officer to get unfair advantage in these 400 cases. But in Jury System, the lawyer will need to bribe or form nexus with 4000 Jurors to get unfair advantage.

  2. It is less prone to quasi_judge-criminal nexuses. Same way, say a career criminal is committing 20-50 crimes a month of beating, harassing etc etc. Say 10 victims decide to file the cases. In the present system, all 10 cases are likely to go before the same 2-3 office-judge. So the criminal has easy time : he has to establish nexus with ONLY 2-3 officers and all the 10 cases a month or 120 cases of the year will get easily taken care of. But in Jury System, the criminal will have to influence 100 citizens a month or rather 1000 citizens a year, which is next to impossible.

  3. The Jury System is faster, as each Jury is given ONLY one case, unlike quasi-judge, who is loaded with 100s of cases. So the verdict would come within days.
So by all means, using Jury in quasi-courts gives a far less nexusprone and yet faster method than existing one.

Draft of the act to create procedure CT.04

To enact CT.04, the citizens would need to pass an act in the State Assembly. I have written that draft. To look at the draft, please click here.

     It will be wiser for citizens to first enact procedure LM.01, and then use LM.01 to pass this act. To know about procedure LM.02, please click here.

If you have any other question, please mail it to Thousand thanks in advance.

Next - CT.06 : Jury System in Lower Courts