R.J.S. Main Examination Solved Paper – (English Language)!
Write an essay on the following topics in about 500 words —
Q.1. Lawyers Role in Speedy Justice-delivery (Essay)
Ans. The bar and the Bench are said to be the two wheels of chariot of Justice. They are so interlinked that in the absence of either of them no judiciary can function. When they claim credit for achievements in the administration of justice, they should also share blame equally for its drawbacks, especially lack of cheap and speedy justice-delivery. The Bar is also held equally responsible for the delay, cost and corruption in the system. Without appropriate reform in legal profession, there cannot be a meaningful reform for the better and timely delivery of justice.
Lawyer is considered to be an important link between the litigant and the judiciary. A lawyer is also an officer of the Court. His behaviour towards the Court, the fellow lawyers and the clients should be dignified, cordial and disciplined, so as to reflect his professional and personal integrity and ability. His duty is not only to strengthen his client’s case but also to assist the Courts to arrive at an appropriate decision. Hence, an enlightened and active role of the lawyer in the process of social engineering and speedy administration of justice is indispensable.
With the increase of number of pending cases and their slow disposal are now considered to be the main grounds of delay in justice-delivery. The Supreme Court by its decision laid down that speedy trial is deemed as a fundamental right, included in Article 21 of the Constitution.
Due to unprecedented changes included by globlisation and technology, all professions, including the legal profession, have been compelled to re-think about the methods, procedures and techniques of delivery of services and management. People have begun to think that even the code of ethics, procedures and methods of disciplining the erring lawyers are to be reworked.
Lawyers can play a major role in speedy justice-delivery.
Following suggestions are made to avoid delay in the administration of justice:—
1. The main problem, which results into increases of pending cases, is the adjournments sought by the advocates (and granted by the Courts) on flimsy and unreasonable grounds. It is advisable that the lawyers should not seek and the Courts should not grant adjournments in a routine manner; and even if they are granted in exceptional cases, the reasons thereof should be recorded and in appropriate cases the party seeking the adjournment should be saddled with heavy costs.
According to some jurists, the maximum number of adjournments in each type of cases can be fixed in the Code. This practice must be strictly followed not only by the litigants but also by the members of the Bar and the Bench. Such dilatory practice for seeking frequent adjournments and filing the documents should be avoided.
2. Sometimes, the lawyers go on strike and boycott Courts, which also causes hindrances in the speedy disposal of cases. The lawyers are not entitled to go on strike or give a call for boycott, not even on a token strike. The Courts are not obliged to adjourn the cases on these grounds. Lawyers should boldly refuse to abide by any such calls for strikes and boycotts.
3. Occasional stories of lawyers in the media fighting with policemen on duty and attacking or misbehaving presiding officers of Courts and Tribunals etc. are ignored as trifling acts and they are not seriously taken as symptoms of a disease causing malfunctioning of the judicial system itself. For the sake of speedy justice-delivery, such practice should be avoided.
4. There should be compulsory apprenticeship, Bar-examinations and screening before starting actual practice in the Courts by the law graduates. That will increases their skill and efficiency which will ultimately become main reason for speedy justice.
5. In appropriate cases, the lawyers should refer their matters for early disposal before the Lok Adalats, trained/learned mediators ai.id arbitrators. This trend will definitely prove as an effective mode for speedy disposal of the cases.
6. Legal knowledge, skills, attitude, specialisation, discipline and ethics of the lawyers, added by well-organised legal education programmes, will definitely increase efficiency and sharpness of lawyers, which will help in speedy justice- delivery.
7. Cases relating to local problems, and trifling cases etc., can be settled by efforts of the concerned lawyers of the parties, joint forum of lawyers, judges and administrators at district or town level.
8. Bar Associations should try their level best for getting increased the number of Courts/judicial officers, keeping in view the large number of pending cases.
9. By submission of brief written arguments in the Courts by both the advocates for the parties, valuable public-time of Courts can be saved.
10. The advocates should not treat their profession merely as a trade, business or means of livelihood, because it is considered to be a ‘noble profession’, keeping in view the humanitarian and ethical norms.
11. If the accused has remained in custody or undergone imprisonment for the maximum prescribed period, then, after expiry of such period, every legal steps should be taken for the release of such accused, by which, the case will automatically be finally disposed of.
12. Many cases/writ-petitions are filed against the Central and State Governments. In appropriate cases, such Governments should settle the cases in Lok Adalats by taking opinions from the experts dealing with legal administrative and accountancy matters. It is desirable to appoint special mechanism to settle such pending cases.
13. There should be accountability and transparency in the working of the members of the Bar and the Bench, which includes the role of administrative staff of the Court.
14. The members of the Bench and the Bar should not be interested for availing vacations and holidays keeping in view the huge pendency of cases, in which the litigants are waiting for decades for the disposal of their cases.
Now this is the high time, rather the time has arrived which demands to reform the system, as suggested above, to come out of the aforesaid shortcomings. It requires joint efforts of the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, so that speedy justice may be administered.
Q.2. Capital Punishment (Essay)
Ans. “The law is made to protect the innocent by punishing the guilty.”— Denial Webster.
There are several, theories of punishments, right from deterrent and retributive to reformative. Theory of ‘eye for eye’, tooth for tooth’ and ‘life for life’ has also been prevalent from primitive age till modern age of civilization. After formation of society, civil life and concept of the kingdom or the State, laws are being made and natural phenomenon necessitated man to think about crimes, ways to check them and to inflict adequate punishments to keep peace and tranquility in the civilized society in place of ‘Rule of Jungle’ or concept of ‘Might is Right”.
Amongst all the punishments, the death sentence or capital punishment is the most deterrent and horrible. It can be said to be a murder under the sanction of the law or according to procedure established by the law.
In the Indian Penal Code, murder, waging war against the Government, dacoity with murder, murder by a life imprisonment-convict, etc. are punishable with death sentence. Apart from that, in the laws like POTA, NDPS Act, there are provisions for capital punishment.
At present, there are three schools of thoughts. The abolitionists’ argument is for abolition of death sentence, the retentionsists advocate its retention, whereas the pragmatists prefer to retain it in exceptional cases. However, in Jagmohan vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 1973 SC 947, the abolitionists lost their battle in the year 1973. Full Bench of the Supreme Court of India firmly decided that the capital punishment is a reasonable sentence in the public interest. The Hon’ble Judges struck to the legal point enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, wherein it was provided “no person shall be deprived of his life except according to the procedure established by law”.
Arguments and logics advanced by abolitionists:—
(i) In welfare States and democratic nations, the citizens have fundamental right to live, whereas the capital punishment is against this concept. Death sentence is barbarity.
(ii) To give life is the most difficult and the greatest work, whereas to kill the person by the authority of law is a sin. To give life and to take life are the acts of Almighty God, so the human beings should not snatch away the life in the gerb of awarding the legal punishment. Murdered man cannot be brought back to his life.
(iii) It is against the reformative theory of punishment. If the capital punishment has wrongly been imposed and executed, then there remains no via media to rectify the human errors of Judges. There are some instances in which the so-called murdered deceased person reappeared after hanging of the innocent accused.
(iv) Offender does not get any opportunity to improve his conduct and habits. The economic, social and psychological conditions are also responsible for the crime committed by the offender. He does not get any opportunity for repentance.
(v) In England, when the offender was publicly hanged, a huge crowd used to gather there and at that time, pick-pocketing activities were rampant, because the crowd remained busy to see the actual hanging just like participating in a fair or festival. It shows that people are not terrified by the capital punishment.
(vi) Some persons cause murders for the sake of their shares in the movable or immovable property disputes.
(vii) “Once a murder is always a murderer …… is myth of criminology.” “The criminal should be treated as a patient in the hospital, and not in the jail.”— Justice Krishna Iyer.
(viii) After execution of death sentence of the accused, orphan members of his family are unnecessarily dragged to miserable life and due to non-fulfilment of basic wants of life, they become hardened criminals.
(ix) “Death penalty is permissible when reformation becomes impossibility. . . Death sentence can never be a virtuous act.”— M.K. Gandhi.
(x) “Offence is not committed due to sin, but it is the result of deficiency of opportunities, environment and social conditions.”—J.L. Nehru.
(xi) “Where death sentence was abolished, there the number of murder cases has decreased.”—’Death sentence in 20th Century’.
Arguments and logic advocated by retentionsists:
(i) Safety of persons and properties and also the situation of law and order/peace and tranquility will be jeopardised in the absence of capital punishment.
(ii) From primitive ages to modem time, its utility has been recognised in the statutes by majority of the countries.
(iii) The capital punishment is the only method to get rid of the anti-social elements and hardened criminals indulged in organised and planned anti-national activities. Capital punishment is the only anti-dose for terrorists, etc.
(iv) The society as a whole, and particularly the criminals, are afraid of death sentence, which definitely reduces the number of offences.
(v) Terror of death sentence keeps intact the dignity and supremacy of Courts and the punishment-system of the society.
(vi) Recently the Hon’ble Ex-Home Minister of India Shri L.K. Adwani has proposed death sentence for the offence of rape.
(vii) Even the doctors of medical profession and scholars of social hygiene say that criminals should be treated as human refuge. If some part the human body has become poisonous, that part must be cut off and thrown away, which is necessary to save the human-life.
(viii) “It is better if one man dies for the sake of life of society as a whole. In the absence of virtues, justice and righteousness, the human life will be without any value”—Kant.
(ix) “Death sentence is the only effective remedy to deter the criminals”—Stephen,
(x) “Murderers should be destroyed”—Lord Goddard.
After careful appreciation, analysis and scrutiny of the ‘for and against’ arguments, quoted supra, we can rationally come to the conclusion that capital punishment should not be abolished. The Law Commission of India, in its 35th report also opined that at present, India should not take risk to abolish death sentence penalty. Apart from that, our Constitution also empowers the President of India and Governors of the States to grant pardon in the cases pertaining to death-sentence.
Now, in India, law of the land is that death sentence can only be imposed in rarest of the rare cases, where actions of the criminals are so much brutal, planned, organised and beastly and the society is not inclined to take risk to give a chance to reform the criminal. It will be better if some statutory guide lines are supplied to the Judges while they are exercising their discretionary powers for awarding the death sentence.
Q.3. Human Rights in India (Essay)
Ans. “Human rights” are the minimal rights, which every individual must have against the State or other public authority. The concept of Human Right is as old as the ancient doctrine of ‘Natural Rights’. This is the natural law.
The expression “Human Rights” is of recent origin, put forwarded by United Nations Organisation in the International Charter and Convention, held on June 25, 1945 at San Francisco, in order to achieve International co-operation in promoting and encouraging the respect for human rights without distinction as to race, caste, class, language or religion. But the concrete step was taken by the United Nations General Assembly in December, 1948 by adopting the Universal Declarations of Human Rights.
But, it was a mere statement without any machinery for enforcement. This deficiency was removed by United Nations General Assembly by adopting two agreements for observation of Human Rights in December, 1966, i.e., (1) Agreement of Civil and Political Rights; and (2) Agreement on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The first agreement formulated the legally enforceable rights of individuals, whereas the second was proposed to the States to implement them by legislation.
These two agreements came to be enforced in December, 1976 after the requisite number of member-States ratified them. Therefore, these agreements are legally binding on the ratifying States. These agreements may not be a part of domestic law of State, but these agreements are enforceable through the domestic Courts.’
India adopted the International Agreement on Civil and Political rights in the year, 1979. Therefore, India must strive for promotion and observation of rights recognised. When Indian Constitution was being drafted in the year 1949, the deliberation for Universal Declaration of Human rights was in aid. The framers of Indian Constitution were influenced by human rights or the ideals, therefore, they were incorporated in the Constitution.
Before the second round table conference, Mahatma Gandhi had announced that India aims to establish a political society, in which there would be no distinction between the high and low class of people, the women should enjoy the same rights as the men together with dignity and justice. This object inspired Jawaharlal Nehru in drafting the History and also Objective Resolution in the Constituent Assembly. These ideals were reflected in the preamble of the Constitution of India, which was adopted in the year, 1949 with the specific mention of Dignity of the Individual.
In the Indian Constitution, the justiciable Human Rights were included in Part-Ill, while non-justiciable and economic rights in Part-IV in Directive Principles of the State Policy. As to the first objective, Article 51(c) was included as a Directive Principle of State Policy.’
51(C): The State shall endeavour to foster respects for international law and treaty obligations in dealing of organised people with one another.
The Supreme Court of India has been directing and enforcing non-justiciable Human Rights, which the Constitution has included them in Part-IV, in the Directive Principles of State Policy, which shall not be enforced by any Court (Article 37). This hurdle is overcomed through the Court’s power to issue ‘Directives’ under Article 32, which is again confined to enforcement of Fundamental Rights in Part-Ill of the Constitution.
In Gupta S.P. vs. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149, the Supreme Court has directed that under Article 39-A, the State shall extend its co-operation and support to voluntary organisations in rendering and running Legal Aid Programme, Legal Aid Camps and Lok Adalats, Further, it is directed that —
(a) Under Article 39(d), to secure equal pay for equal work.
(b) Under Article 39(a), to secure the citizens adequate means of livelihood.
(c) Under Article 43, the Government is directed to offer minimum wages to workers engaged in drought relief operations.
(d) Under Article 46, the State is directed to provide re-settlement who were displaced by working of the State Dam Project.
(e) Under Article 48-A, the State has been directed to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard forests and wild life of the country.
(f) Under Article 39(f), the Court has directed to bring Children Act without any delay because of the obligation to protect the children.
Fundamental Rights are themselves the Natural Rights. Natural Law stands above the law of the land. So natural rights are sacred than legal rights because they are independent, and are not prescribed by any human authority. The fundamental rights cannot be affirmed by ordinary process of legislation. The fundamental rights are not enforced against any private individual, except where the State supports such private action.
The citizens of India can enjoy the fundamental rights, like:
(a) Right to vote (Article 326)
(b) Right against discrimination in public places (Articles 14 and 15)
(c) Rights to hold public office and employment (Article 16)
(d) Right of the freedom (Article 19)
(e) Right to equal protection before law (Article 14)
(f) Right to life and personal liberty and right against arbitrary arrest (Article 21)
(g) Right against exploitation (Article 23)
(h) Right to freedom of religion (Article 25)
In case of Unni Krishnan J.P. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1993 SC 2178, the Supreme Court has evolved following rights as fundamental rights —
(a) Right to privacy.
(b) Right to human dignity.
(c) Right to travel abroad.
(d) Right against torture or degrading treatment, like hand-cuffing.
(e) Right to speedy trial.
(f) Right to free legal aid in criminal trials,
(g) Right against delayed executions,
(h) Right against custodial violence.
(i) Right to shelter.
(j) Right to health.
(k) Right to pollution free environment.
(l) Right to freedom of press,
(m) Right of children education.
India has enacted the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which has defined in Section 2(d) that the term “Human rights” means the Right relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by Constitution or embodied under the International Agreements and enforceable by the Courts in India.
Thus, it can be said that Human Rights are fundamental rights and Human Rights are natural rights. They stand above the law of the land and are sacred more than legal rights, because they exist independent of the law of the land, therefore, they are being respected and India has spared nothing in taking care to implement the Universal Declarations on Human Rights, 1996.
Q.4. Law and Social Justice (Essay)
India is the world’s largest working democracy. The preamble of the Indian Constitution stresses “to secure to all citizens: Justice – social, economic and political” and also “Equality of status and of opportunity”. Socio-economic justice has been given preference, probably because without socio-economic justice, political justice is meaningless. It indicates that the makers of our Constitution realised vital importance of these aspects of justice. For any country, its economy is also of great significance because its growth leads the country on the path of progress and welfare.
The concept of social justice is founded on the basic ideal of socio-economic equality and its aim is to assist the removal of socio-economic disparities and inequalities. Social justice connotes the balance of adjustments of the various interests in the socio-economic structure of the State to promote harmony on ethical and economic basis. Social justice means fair play and justice for each section of the society, especially the poor and weaker sections, indicating well of the society in general. The money should be so distributed that each section of the society gets its due share. The basic framework of social justice is to provide reasonable standard of life and socio-economic security from the cradle to the grave, including economic equality and equitable distribution of income. Without providing the basic necessities (food, clothes and shelter) and the basic amenities of life (like education and medical-care) to our people, we cannot achieve socio-economic justice in the country.
Part III of the Constitution of India provides Fundamental Rights, which are enforceable by law, wherein Article 14 relates to equality before law and Article 15(1) deals with prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex and place of birth. Further, Article 15(4) makes a provision for reservation of the socially and educationally backward classes and the scheduled Castes/Tribes of the society.
Part IV of the Constitution enshrines the Directive Principles of State Policy. These principles, though not enforceable in Courts like the fundamental rights, are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws. It has been provided that to promote the welfare of the people, the State will work for securing and protecting common good to ensure socioeconomic justice.
Despite the constitutional mandates, the Government and the administrative authorities have proved incapable to enforce the constitutional provisions. The largest quantum of money goes to the rich and this section of the society, already possessing huge wealth, is becoming richer and the poor strata of the society is becoming poorer, who are deprived of their just share. The elite class of the society does not want that the weaker and down-trodden section of the society should get its share in the socioeconomic growth.
The exploitations, harassments, atrocities and cruelties are inflicted on poorer and weaker section of the society. Although our Constitution provides reservation for the weaker section, yet the needy persons have not been reasonably benefited. If shows that the” laws made for promoting the social justice are not strictly and effectively enforced and implemented. Many a times, false assurances are given by the politicians for upliftment of the poor, which are not translated into action.
In order to distribute the money proportionately to each section of the society, the Government worked out several schemes like the Jawahar Rozgar Yojna and the Integrated Rural Development Project etc., but, unfortunately, a very small percentage of the sanctioned money reaches the real needy persons due to corruption and inefficiency prevalent in the whole system. Our late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi once said that eighty five per cent of the allocated money for the poor goes down in drain, Mahatma Gandhi’s cherished concept of Ram-Rajya in the country has still been a distant dream.
Quality of life is still below the accepted norms of normal standard of living. There is lack of proper education and awareness in the society as a whole, and especially the position of women folk is more pitiable. Weaker section of the society suffers from malnutrition and disease. They are badly in need of suitable jobs. Even the educated section of society is also suffering the pains of unemployment and underemployment. Reservation policy has not fully given benefit to the needy persons.
Below poverty line people are still deprived of their basic needs and amenities, like food, clothes, shelter, education and medical care. For enforcing the fundamental rights, common men are generally unable to file writ petitions in the Supreme Court or the High Court of the State, because it is very costly, complicated and delaying affair, which poor persons are unable to afford. Although the Constitution prohibits forced labour, bonded labour and child labour etc., yet the exploitation of labour is still continuing.
Socio-economic growth has always been society’s paramount concern. Equitable distribution of money is the sine quo none of the social justice. Economic inequalities and mass poverty prevalent in the society make a mockery of our political democracy because without socio-economic justice, political justice is meaningless. But, we are hopeful that in the 21st century, the elitist class would come forward to share their benefits with other weaker, down-trodden and less privileged class of the society for achieving the social justice.
Q.5. Human Rights and Crimes against women (Essay)
Ans. It is rightly described that human beings are born with certain natural rights. Those fundamental, basic and natural rights, which are essential for decent human life, are called as ‘human rights’. All the persons are born equal and their creator invests them with certain basic, natural, inherent, inalienable, indivisible and non-derogable rights, so that they may lead decent life, with freedom, liberty, harmony, equality, security, happiness and dignity. Human rights are considered to be sound guarantee of democracy.
Gender-based discrimination, which is global, is prevalent from the time immoral, which reveals the ugly face of the society. It is a travesty on the fundamental rights relating to equality before law and equal protection of law and also blot on the cannons of social justice. Women who constitute near about half of the global population and they work for two-third of the world’s working hours receive only one-tenth of world’s income and less than one percent of the world’s property, are victims of injustice and inequality. Women are burning in the fire of rape, prostitution, “sati-pratha’ eve-teasing, kidnapping, abduction, dowry, child-marriage, female foeticide, infanticide, cruelty and torture in police-custody, etc.
At this stage, it is expedient to quote the relevant verses of the poem, which runs thus—
“I am the woman who holds up the sky. The rainbow runs through my eyes. The sun makes a path to my womb. My thoughts are in the shape of clouds. But my words are yet to come.”
International Human Rights Foundations for Gender Rights.—
Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that everyone is entitled to all of the rights and freedoms set forth in the UDHR, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, political or other opinion, national or social origin, birth or other status.
Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights notes that all are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of the UDHR and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Human Rights and Women Universal Declaration of Human Rights.—
The Preamble of the United Nations Charter (1945) begins by referring a faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human persons, in the equal rights of men and women.
Human rights may be defined as the rights and freedoms that every person on the earth are entitled to enjoy, viz., right to social security, right to equality, right of life, liberty and security of persons etc., without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or the opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or status.
As per the Declaration of Human Rights, women along with men are entitled for the following civil and political rights as the terms ‘no one’ and ‘everyone’ consists both men and women.
(1) No one shall be held in slavery or servitude (Article 4).
(2) No one shall be subjected to torture or cruelty, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 5).
(3) Everyone has the right of recognition everywhere as a person before the law (Article 6).
(4) Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunal for acts violating the fundamental rights of Constitution (Article 8).
(5) No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile (Article 9).
(6) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved according to law in a public trial (Article 11).
(7) Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent tribunal (Article 10).
(8) No one shall be subject to arbitrary interference with his/her privacy, family, home or correspondence nor to attacks upon his/her honour and reputation (Article 12).
(9) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State (Articlel3).
(10) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution (Article 14).
(11) Everyone has the right to a nationality (Article 15).
(12) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property (Article 17).
(13) Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. (Article 18).
(14) Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Article 19).
(15) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association (Article 20).
(16) Everyone has the right to take part in the Government of his country (Article 21).
The United Nations Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women 1967:—
The General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Convention on the 7th November, 1967. Article 10 of this convention directs that all appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure to women, married or unmarried, equal rights with men in the field of economic and social life, and in particular —
(a) The right without discrimination on grounds of material status or any other grounds to receive vocational training to work, to free choice of professional and employment advancement:
(b) The right to equal remuneration with men and to equality of treatment in respect of work of equal value;
(c) The right to leave with pay, retirement, privileges and provision for security in respect of unemployment, sickness, old age or other incapacity to work;
(d) The right to receive family allowance on equal terms, with men.
The United Nations Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1979 (CEDAW) – Vienna Declaration.—As per Article 11 of this Convention, the State parties are required to take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of employment in order to ensure the following rights on the basis of equality of men and women—
(a) The right to work as an inalienable right of all the human beings;
(b) The right to the same employment opportunities, including the application of the same criteria for selection in matter of employment;
(c) The right of free choice of profession and employment, the right to promotion, job security and all benefits and conditions of service and the right to erective vocational training and retraining, including apprenticeship, advanced vocational training and recurrent training;
(d) The right to equal remuneration, including benefit and to equal treatment in respect of work of equal values, as well as equality of treatment in the evaluation of equality of work;
(e) The right to social security, particularly in cases of retirement, unemployment, sickness, invalidity and old age and other capacity to work, as well as the right to paid leave; and
(f) The right to protection of health to safety in working conditions including the safeguarding of the function of reproduction.
Apart from Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, the conventions/conferences are relevant on the aforesaid subject in the International Legal sphere:—
United Nations World Conference on Human Rights, 1998;
Conversion on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 1979;
Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984;
First World Conference on Women, Mexico, 1975.
The General Assembly, on 18.12.1979, adopted on international human rights treaty, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
Burning Questions.—
The question of gender equality is unanswered from a time immoral and is still a burning problem. Even today, women are given secondary status right from their birth. Sons are given preference and daughters are treated as burdens. Women are viewed as dependents of the males and they are facing restrictions in the fields of their education, career, financial opportunities, free mobility, forming unions freedom of speech and expression and decision making discretions. Practice of female foeticide, infanticide and domestic violence is also prevalent.
Indian Perspective.—
So far as India is concerned, the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, provides for the Constitution of the National/State Human Rights Commissions and Human rights Courts, presided by the Sessions Judges, for better and effective protection of human rights. The creation of Human Rights Courts at district level, providing for speedy trial, has a great potential to protect human rights at the grass roots. But, these commissions have not been provided with sufficient autonomy.
Women themselves are expected to play a key role in shaping the welfare of the future generations. Household and regional factors also play an important role in the matter of gender equalities.
In the Indian Penal Code, for the protection of women, Sections 304-B and 498-A have been introduced to check domestic cruelty and violence; important amendments in the penal laws have also been made for the custodial deaths; and accordingly necessary insertions and amendments have also been made in the Indian Evidence Act. Apart from it, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 has also been passed to protect women and to safeguard their dignity.
From the study of the social evolution of human society, it reveals that in the old feudal system, women were given an inferior status. In the medieval era, it was off- quoted that women are meant only for the recreation and creation of men. Women have always been kept in a dependent position. Their social status compounds their gender injustice and consequently they are also facing the social injustice. Woman is subjected to a crime like rape. It is often said that she is raped at home and then in the public life followed by sensational reports in the media and agonising investigation in the police custody and then cross-examination in the Court.
The status of woman in the hierarchical structure of society also comes in the way to secure justice. She is lacking in position and power.
Some Socio-Legal Reforms.—
Despite resistance from the orthodoxy, women’s education has been acquiring greater importance and acceptance. Sati Prohibition laws have been legislated, whereby ‘Sati- pratha’ has been totally banned. Now, women are well exercising their right of adult franchise, i.e., right to vote. In India, child-marriages have been banned by Sharda Act of 1929 and widows have been allowed to remarry by Hindu Widows Remarriage Act.
By passing of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, many reformatory steps for women have been taken. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, has made the act of giving and taking of dowry to be a punishable offence. Several labour laws, e.g., the Factories Act and the Payment of Wages Act, etc. have been enacted to improve the economic status of the women. In I.P.C., cruelty and dowry deaths have been made punishable offences, for the welfare of the women.
To get rid of the gender injustice, there is need of education, awareness and economic development for the women. Rights of women today need a mobilisation of revolutionary consciousness and positive action to win the battle for gender justice.
India should actively join hands with the people of world in this global task of liberating all people from fear, torture and harassment and of promoting human rights. Law-makers, Courts and lawyers should take special note to achieve this target and to translate the human rights in reality.
Expand any one of the following ideas in about 100 words:—
Q.1. Ignorance of law is no excuse. (Essay)
Ans. The meaning of the Latin maxim “ignorantia legis neminem excusat” is that ignorance of law is no excuse.
Whereas ignorance of fact can be excused to the extent that it negatives mens rea, or fault.
Its proposition is that no man can be excused from doing his duty by saying that he did not know the relevant law. Ignorance of law is no defence for him. However, it can be a matter to be taken into consideration in mitigation of punishment.
According to some jurists, this maxim cannot be carried to the extent of saying that every person must be presumed to know every piece of legislation enacted by competent legislature.
There are many cases in which equity, upon a mere mistake of law, without admixture of other circumstances, has given relief to a party who dealt with the property due to influence of such mistake.
Q.2. Justice should be tampered with mercy (Essay)
Mercy, which is a human virtue, should generally be adhered by every living being.
But, when a person presides over as a Judge, then justice should be tampered with mercy only for that party who is, in fact, eligible, for the mercy. Innocent victims should be benefited by mercy, whereas hardened criminals and crooked litigants should never be favoured with mercy. If a Judge will not show mercy to a deserving party, then it will create an atmosphere of terror in the society, but, on the other hand, if a non-deserving anti-social party is extended the same benefit of mercy, then there will be lawlessness and anarchism.
A Judge should always administer the justice without fear or favour and without any affection or ill-will. A Judge should separate the grain from the chaff. In the same way, while inflicting the punishment to a hardened criminal, terrorist or anti-social element, justice should never be tampered with mercy.