Abstract

The pendency of cases would be considered a major problem in the criminal justice system of India. Different modes of dispute resolution have been adopted by our courts to settle disputes outside the courtrooms. Ultimately, it proves beneficial for poor litigants. The author has tried to evaluate the reasons why the Indian criminal justice delivery system would not be ready to mould itself according to the need of present society. While civil jurisdiction has adopted a robust ADR (alternative dispute resolution) mechanism, on the other hand, the criminal court is still reluctant to adopt different modes of resolution except for conciliation and mediation. Although mediation has been used in some cases, the success rate is too low to consider it an effective mode of dispute resolution. The system of plea bargaining has also not been used properly because of various reasons which are being discussed by the author in this article. The various techniques adopted by different countries to resolve a variety of disputes will also be necessary to discuss to evaluate the progress happening in India.

• 1.   D.K.Basu v. The State of West Bangal (1997) 1 SCC 416
• 2.   The Legal Services Authority Act, 1987
• 3.   State of Gujrat v/s Natwar Harchandji Thakor, (2005) Cr.L.J 2987
• 4.   In the matter of Matrimonial v. State of UP and Others, Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 3322 of 2010 (Allahabad High Court)
• 5.   The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
• 6.   The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
• 7.   Mauro Cappelletti, Alternative Dispute Resolution Processes within the Framework of the worldwide access to justice movement, The Modern Law Review, May 1993, Vol.56, No.3, Dispute Resolution Civil Justice and its Alternatives (May 1993) pp.282-292.
• 8.   M.Cappelletti and B.Garth ‘Access to Justice’ The Worldwide Movement to make Rights effective, A General Report in access to justice, Vol.1, Book p.1ff.
• 9.   Kart.D.Elizabeth, Criminal Law in a Civil Guise: The Evolution of Family Courts and Support Laws. The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol.86, No.5 (September 2019), pp.1241-1310.
• 10.   Volpe R. Maria, Post Disaster ADR Responses: Promises and Challenges, Fordham Environmental Law Review, Vol.26, No.1 Symposium: Eye of the Storm: Hurricane Sandy
• 11.   Steegh.Ver. Nancy, Family Court Reform and ADR: Shifting Values and Expectations Transform the Divorce Process, Family Law Quarterly, Vol.42, No.3, Golden Anniversary Issue (2008) pp.659-671.
• 12.   Reuben.c.Richard, Public Justice: Toward a State Action Theory of Alternative Dispute Resolution, California Law Review, Vol.85, No.3 (May, 1997),pp.577-641.

Data Sharing Statement

Funding