CRITICISING WHAT he described as the growing number of criminal cases that should never enter the justice system, Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Friday pointed to cases registered against people for consuming a particular kind of food, reciting poems, raising slogans seeking bail for others, participating in demonstrations, commenting on social media, performing stand-up comedy, and even over the content or titles of films and books.“The accusations are ridiculous and often border on an affront to one’s intelligence. Nonetheless, registration of such criminal cases continues unabated. Not only that, in some cases chargesheets are also filed, leading to trial knowing fully well what would be the outcome,” he said.Speaking at an event organised by the Centre for Discourse on Criminal and Constitutional Jurisprudence at India International Centre, New Delhi, on the theme ‘Ethics in Criminal Litigation — Duties of Defence & The Prosecution’, Justice Bhuyan said: “At the drop of a hat, their sentiments are hurt. And they file this type of cases.”He said such prosecutions were adding to the burden on an already overburdened criminal justice system. Citing figures from the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), Justice Bhuyan said more than 4.27 crore criminal cases were pending across Indian courts as of September 17, with trial courts accounting for 95% of that backlog.“When you have so many cases clogging the court system, with the system unable to cope with it, as if almost bursting at the seams, superimposition of such frivolous cases is only adding to the unworkable burden on the trial courts,” he said.He called for a special drive by trial courts to clear such “frivolous litigation” and proposed a one-time amnesty for non-serious criminal cases. “There can be a one-time amnesty across the board for non-serious cases, non-sessions cases… so that our courts can concentrate on those cases which require our concentration,” he said.Referring to custodial violence and alleged encounter killings, he said he was being forced to reconsider the belief that such practices had substantially receded after landmark judicial interventions.Story continues below this ad“I thought that after D K Basu (D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, 1997), custodial violence is a thing of the past. But I am forced to reconsider this,” he said, adding that “extrajudicial killings are on the rise in India”.“Policemen resorting to extrajudicial killings is unacceptable. It’s failure of policing; it’s failure of investigation.”Referring to instances where accused persons taken to crime scenes late at night subsequently die in police action, Justice Bhuyan questioned the necessity of such exercises. He also criticised what he described as young police officers becoming personally involved in confrontations with protesters.“You are a professional police officer. Why do you need to get so agitated? Beating up demonstrators with bare hands,” he said. “One shudders to think what will happen if such a police officer gets custody at night. It is for this reason many of us are quite wary of sending people to police custody.”Story continues below this adTurning to the role of public prosecutors, Justice Bhuyan said decisions to withdraw prosecutions must reflect an independent application of mind rather than executive direction.“Can the public prosecutor say, ‘No, I have applied my own mind, I cannot subscribe to this, I will not seek a withdrawal from the prosecution’?” he said. “I doubt whether we have any such public prosecutor left in this country who can stand up to this.”Acknowledging the institutional pressures public prosecutors face, he said: “Not all public prosecutors are that affluent that they can afford to antagonise their boss.” He said any prosecutor who independently resists pressure deserves admiration.Justice Bhuyan said public confidence in the criminal justice system ultimately depends on fairness of process. “A conviction should be trusted because it was obtained fairly. An acquittal should likewise be trusted because it was argued honestly,” he said. “The prosecutor must be fair, and the defence lawyer must be honest.”Story continues below this adSC judge Justice Abhay S Oka and Delhi HC judge Justice Amit Sharma also spoke at the event. The event was also attended by former judges, senior advocates and members of the Bar.