Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CRPC LR 2
CRPC LR 2
Author(s): A. G. Noorani
Source: Economic and Political Weekly , Jun. 18, 1983, Vol. 18, No. 25 (Jun. 18, 1983),
pp. 1090-1091
Published by: Economic and Political Weekly
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Economic and Political Weekly
1980-81 (Rs 3,618 crore). The increase deprived of his ,life or personal liberty reasonable, fair and just procedur'q
except according to procedure estab- and the right accrues from the stage
was more pronounced in the case of
timne deposits. There was greater lished by law". The Supreme Court of production before the magistrate
ruled that this did not give the legis regardless of request by the accused,
buoyancy in credit to the commercial
sector during the 1982-83 season. lature power to make any law or pre- if the offence is one which might entail
Credit for purposes other than food scribe any procedure. Th law must be a sentence of imprisonment and the
procurement expanded markedly by one which is not violative of any other circumstances of the case or the inte-
RIs 3,530 crore, perceptibly larger than fundamental right and the procedur,e rests of justice require legal represen-
the increase of Rs 1,395 crore and must be one which is fair, reasonable tation. Why the Court exempted eco-
Rs 3,247 crore, respectively, in 1981-82 and just. Thus the procedure in a cri- nomic offences from the purview of
and 1980-81 busv seasons. The smart minal trial must conform to these cri- this requirement is hard to under-
pick-up in credit in the recent period teria. Tle possibilities of evolution in stand. What if a political opponent of
is a signal that the RBI may have to future are enormous. the regime is hauled up on precisely
review its policy designed to put pres- Soon thereafter the Supreme Court such a false charge?
sure on the liquidity- position of bals has ruled in Madhav Hoskot's case It is all to the good that the Court
around the middle of July. The incre- that Article 21 [read with Article lhas repeatedly given directions for
mental non-ood credit-deposit ratio 19(1)(d)] requires that the Coult shaill speeding up of investigations and trials.
worked out to 92.8 per cent as against furnish a free transcript of the judg- It is estimated that sone 65 lakh
61.9 per cent in 1981-82 season and 90 ment when sentencing a person to a cases are now pending before mnagis-
per cent in 1980-81 season. At Rs 411 prison term and provide every facilitv trates and 3.5 lakh cases before Ses-
crore, incremental food credit was also to. him for filing an appeal. Further. sions Judges. It would be interesting
larger than Bs 189 crore recorded last "when the prisoner is disabled from to know how many of the accused
vear. Total investments in government engagng a lawyer, on reasonable are on trial. Incidentally, the Court
and other approved securities were grounds such as indigence or incom- has also ruled that grant of bail is
higher at Rs 1,903 crore compared to municado situation, the Court shall if the norm and its refusal an excep-
Its 1,415 crore in 1981-82 season. How- the circumstances of the case, the tion. Nor are sureties a must. A man
ever, incremental investment-deposit gravity of the sentence, and the ends can be released on his own bond too.
ratio stood lower at 50 per cent as of justice so require, assign competent So gross are the delays in our courts
against 629.7 per cent in the previous counsel for the prisoner's defence, pro- that it is interesting to note that
busy season. The banks drew down their vided the party does not object to as recently as on May 4, Justice
baulances maintained with the RBI to thethat lawyer". The state "shall pay to T Sathiadev of the Madras High Court
extent of Rs 938 crore, while their bor- assigned counsel such sum as the admitted a writ petition filed by P
rowings from the RBT were higher by couirt may equitably fix". These pre- Rangaraian Kumaramangalam, a prac-
1l0
1091