By Dr Mookhi Amir Ali,
One agrees with the Law and Judiciary Minister (Maharashtra) Radhakrishna Vikhe-Patil that ideally the conviction rate in criminal cases fought by the state should be hundred percent. The present conviction rate only shows enormous waste of public money and valuable working hours of the courts. But why does he want to discipline only the pleaders by imposing fifty per cent conviction rate?
The problem does not lie with the public prosecutors as much as the Minister wants us to believe. It should be remembered that a state is expected not to take a citizen to court unless it is reasonably sure of his conviction. It is not only a great waste of state resources and time but is also a gross violation of human rights. How can the state take away the liberty of a citizen without proper reasons?
A thorough investigation and presenting the credible evidence to the government pleader to fight the case with is the responsibility of the investigating agency. What the police department in many cases does is make some hurried arrests of innocent persons calling them masterminds of the crime. The media is given the impression that the case is cracked. In fact, detainees are scapegoats and it becomes the government pleader’s lot to fight the case with the half baked brief. It is the government pleader who has, then, to cringe under the glare of a judge when he is asked, “Do you call this evidence?” The case, in the meantime goes cold, the real culprits living happily everafter. Hyderabad’s Makka Masjid bomb blast case is an example.
The remedy for the poor rate of conviction is thorough investigation directed towards solving the case. A pleader’s weapon is evidence. The effectiveness of that weapon must be ascertained by a panel of lawyers before the case goes to court. Only then the government is justified in expecting hundred per cent conviction, not fifty.