Report No. 14

30. Panchayat Courts.-

At the base of the administration of Civil Justice are courts which may be called the Village Panchayat Courts. Prior to the integration of the Travancore and Cochin States these courts were constituted under the statutes enacted by the respective States. The Registrar of Village Courts, Cochin, who gave evidence before us stated that the courts in the Cochin region (about the working of which alone he had knowledge) were functioning satisfactorily and added that out of an approximate number of 4000 cases decided by these courts every year only about forty or fifty would go in revision.

In 1954, an Act was passed defining the set-up, jurisdiction and powers of the Village Courts in the entire Travancore-Cochin State. These courts are not Panchayat Courts in the sense in which the expression is used, for example, in Uttar Pradesh. They appear to be Benches manned by laymen having the power of courts of lower grade Munsifs, as it were, with small and limited jurisdiction, these courts have powers to execute their decrees including the power to detain the judgment-debtors in civil prison. This is the only State in the entire country which permits legal practitioners to appear before these courts; the fee payable to the legal practitioner has been fixed at a maximum of Rs. 3 per case.

31. Separation of the judiciary.-

The judiciary in the State has been separated from the executive by administrative orders. The Madras pattern of separation is followed by this State. The Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898) as amended by Act (XXVI of 1955) was amended by Kerala Act (V of 1957) whereby the appellate powers of the District they existed prior to the coming into force of the said Act (XXVI of 1955) were restored. Appeals against the decisions of second and third class Magistrates, therefore, lie to the District Magistrates.

32. Criminal Courts-state of work.-

The accompanying Table (No. 12) shows the disposal of work in different classes of criminal courts in the State during the year 1955-56.

Table No. 12

	Session case				Criminal Appeals					Criminal Revision
Designation of officers	No. of officers	Pending at the beginning of the year	Institution	Disposals	Balance		Pending	Institution	Disposal	Balance		Institution	Disposal	Balance
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16
District & Session Judges and Addl. Session Judges	9+13	73	439	370	142	..	97	462	402	157	..	174	141	99	..
District Magistrates	4	..	..	..	..	.	29	331	285	75	..	264	307	35	..
Sub-Divisional Magistrates and First Class Magistrates	10+25	..	..	..	..	..	118	184	299	3	..	..	..	..	..
Second Class Magistrates	32	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..	..

Criminal Cases
Cases under I.P.C.					Other Cases
Pending at the beginning of the year	Institution	Disposal	Balance		Pending at the beginning of the year	Institution	Disposal	Balance
			Below one year	Over One year				Below one year	Over One year
..	..	..	..	..	1	1589	1588	8	..
2	252	199	55	..	..	..	..	..	..
*23510	33084	37564	17012	2018	1312	10471	1470	789	..
*17134	32916	36766	12121	1163	..	..	..	..	..

*2. Second Class Magistrates Courts were converted into First Class Magistrates Courts; hence the difference in the pendency.

The position in the criminal courts is also far from satisfactory. There are a large number of year old cases and case properties have not been disposed of in some courts for years. Piecemeal hearings of cases and absence of witness is far too common. There is great scope for improvement in this connection.

33. Supervision.-

Closely connected with the problem of delays in the subordinate courts is the insufficiency of supervision exercised by the district judges and the High Court over the subordinate judiciary. No administrative powers to deal with the Munsifs or subordinate judges have been delegated to the district judges; they seem to be merely the agents of the High Court for collection of information in tabular statements for transmission to the High Court. The district and sessions judges are not looked upon as officers on whom rests the responsibility for the efficient administration of justice in the districts.

Though they inspect the courts subordinate to them usually once a year they merely send their inspection reports to the High Court without commenting upon the work turned out by the subordinate judicial officers. At the time we visited Kerala all postings including that of inferior and last grade staff seemed to be done only by the High Court, the District Judges being powerless in this regard. Greater delegation of powers and responsibility to the District Judge appears to be necessary.

It is true that each Judge of. the High Court has been placed in administrative charge of one or two districts, but scrutiny of the periodical returns received from the districts and supervision is not so detailed and rigorous as it may well be. There is undoubtedly scope for greater supervision over both the civil and criminal judiciary. We were told that the "Calendar Statement System" whose working has been explained in the chapter on supervision has been dispensed with.

The advantages of this system need not be reiterated here. It should be revived. What effective supervision can do in this regard is demonstrated by the fact that the conditions in the Kanya Kumari District of Madras, which originally formed part of Travancore have undergone a marked improvement after the re­introduction of the system of submission of calendar statements and intensified supervision.

34. Prosecuting agency and witnesses.-

It was stated in the evidence before us that the inadequacy of prosecuting officers occasioned delays and an examination of the order sheets in some criminal cases reveals that the complaint is justified.

We also learnt that in this State the budget provision for each criminal court for payment of batta to witnesses is limited-and that once it is exhausted witnesses who attend court are not paid any allowances. This state of affairs should be immediately set right by suitable administrative measures.

35. Reporting of crimes.-

Delays in the investigation of crime are also said to arise from a defective system of reporting of offences, which obtains in the State except the areas which were originally part of Madras. The revenue villages which are fairly big, both in size and population, are in charge of village officers who are not headmen in the usual sense of the term. Reports of crimes are not made by the village officers and even the obligation cast on them by section 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code seems to be ignored. Information of crime has to be carried by the person interested to the police station; there are normally only two station-houses for each taluq.

The officer-in-charge of a police out-post is not authorised to register a case and he does not even receive or record any report made to him. He merely refers the complainant to the police station concerned after making an entry in a general diary. In the case of heinous crimes, however, he goes to the scene of the offence and awaits the arrival of the police officials.

36. The need for establishing a better reporting agency in each village should be examined and the proper performance by village officers of their duties under section 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be insisted on.

37. Legal aid.-

This State has the distinction of being the only one in India having an organised system of Legal Aid. Details of the scheme will be found in Appendix III to our chapter on Legal Aid.

Back

Index

Next