 We will begin with the first technical session and I am profusely overjoyed to take the opportunity to introduce the speaker of our first technical session of him, Sunwa, a distinguished advocate of Guwahati Fine Arts. He is an experienced and proficient advocate and is well known for his work in the field of law and justice. He has been the Standing Council for the GC since the year 2010 and was also the former Standing Council Higher Education Government of Assam. We are incredibly thankful to him for accepting our invitation. He would be speaking on the topic of fast-track quotes, necessity of the art. Sir, we are indeed honored to have met with us today and with these words, I kindly welcome you to the guys and I request you to kindly address the gathering. Before handing over to sir, I request Dr. Sridhi Srikachadhyayi to kindly address Dr. Sridhi Srikachadhyayi. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Sridhi Srikachadhyayi. Over to you sir. Good morning everyone. It is really not very well today. I am practicing at the Guwahati High Court since last few moments and years and I am doing a research work under Dr. Parvaj Sankaraparkar Gohan Sahib. He was the former advocate general of Assam and Professor of the University and I have also been researched under him as my senior. So, he was invited to this session and he has already answered the question in Super Cal. So, he delegated this thing to me. I cannot replace him for this year, but I am trying to address certain groups. This was a really short speech. Amrita Mam is working on this line. This line since very long and persons like Amrita Mam and others, are much wiser than me, but I am just sharing my sum of my experience. A police gentleman says, walking on the ground as a police officer and understood the very root causes of all these things. And being a lawyer, we have come across many such cases and these officials justice delivery system in our country. Just understanding some of my experience and some of my thoughts, which may be a little helpful to you. First of all, I don't understand, I don't know why. I have just said before the message left a few minutes ago that why this seminar was not made gender neutral? Not because that I am a man, that is why I have said. It could have been made more wiser by saying rule of first and foremost in that in relevant existence. It could have been more wiser. Anyway, this was in a wider sense. Don't think it either way. Because every heinous crime, heinous crime is a crime which may be against a man or a woman. Kindness is a crime. Every crime should be dealt with in a manner. Should be dealt with in a manner that punishment imposed or inflicted upon the criminals set an example by looking at which the like mind that people will desire to commit such offense again. There are two theories of punishment that I understand to be effective is that deterrence and reformative. Retributive punishment also leads because I for an I is not applicable now because we are not living another thing. So, deterrence and reformative. Reformative is of course for the first kind of offenders, for the first time of offenders, which are habitual offenders, which are committed heinous crime like gang rape and all. We must set examples by giving exemplary punishment. And not only that, we must give an exemplary punishment. It must go and it must be reached to the society at large that see if you do this, this is the punishment. Punishment otherwise we do it that punishment is how rigorous is. Punishment how rigorous is, how painful is. The society is not going to reform. Governments brings enactment for two reasons. Laws comes into society for two reasons. One, co-pop with the changing needs of the society and two, to change the society as per law. Am I clear? Number one, to co-pop with the changing needs of the society or to change the society as per law. Changing needs of the society, cyber act. Changing needs of the society in information technology act like some new acts, the Muslim women protection of Muslim women rights and marriages act 2019. This is changing needs of the society. But to change the society as per law, IBC 376, ABCD This is to change the society as per law. To restrain this, to restrain the child marriage, to restrain sexual offences against the child. Now, coming to the first act code. What is the first act code? Is there any definition? What is the first act code? Is there any provision in law that we master the first act code? First act in my understanding means which runs first. The track of which, in which track we are going towards the justice delivery system which runs first. And Prof. Aurob Chaudhary sir, in his three lines sentence speech has spoken the crux of the whole seminar today. Because justice delayed is justice denied, justice hurried is justice buried. Now we have to strike a balance between the two. Because 90, almost 85% 498 cases ends in fiasco. 85% of 498 cases ends in acquittal. Now if it is a subject matter of research, whether this is a faulty investigation, whether this is the witnesses stand hostile, whether this is the case that it was not properly prosecuted by the prosecution. This is subject matter of research. See, there is no loopholes of law. There is no dirt of acts and rules. The only thing is that we have dirt infrastructure. Just now I said can you imagine of a hospital where 150 crore patients and 26,000 doctors. Ours is a country where having 150 crores of population and 26,000 judicial officers. Just imagine. We are talking about first rate court. There is no first rate court at all. The same judge, the same court who has been given a case, giving a tax, then this is a first rate matter. And he has to hear it day by day. Day by day. When I mean, day to day basis. The police officer who investigated the matter in Naga, before three years, after filing a search he was transferred to Dhubri. And he is coming to give witnesses in a first rate court in Naga. Now imagine. I need not to explain. Your advice is enough to understand. Someone do not share from the witnesses. Witness died, witness lived. Now court has to act upon the materials available on records. Not on the air, not on the emotions. Three days ago I talked with the district judge of Naga who is doing the trial of Ovinil case. Ovinil murder is what? Maublin Singh of this Guwahati boys who were killed in Cardian love. The district judge is a very good friend of mine. I called him. What is the state of this case? You are going into the first rate court. What is the boss? It will take another six months. Why? Look at the IO, there are three IO. The main IO who investigated the whole matter, he is a regular failure patient. He has been hospitalized. The moment he gets cured he comes for reducing evidence. Failing. Ten minutes, fifteen minutes cross-examination then he goes away. Then again after one month he comes. And without his evidence this matter cannot be tried. So he explained in difficulties what is going on. Can a first rate court bypass that predicament? Can a first rate court keep on going or keep on adjudicating the matter without taking the evidence of the prime IO? I am with the investigating officer. Now coming to the practical problem I am talking about. Now coming to the subject that role of a first rate court in delivering injustice. All the time I will not say the word women because if I say first rate court kindly understand that I am talking about first rate court delivering injustice to women. Now we are from this, the genesis, this is very academic, very fundamental of the first rate court or justice delivery system is that concept of human rights is the very fundamental things of justice delivery system. We have, and if the concept of first rate court is a judicially evolved concept. There is nothing called first rate court in Sri Lanka city, there is no provision. So the human rights, the concept of human rights for the first time was discussed in United Nations Circle 1947 which was held in San Francisco. And from there only the article 1, this is the preamble, I believe it would be very monotonous if I read the preamble, everybody knows it. This is the preamble where it is saying that every person should be treated with human dignity, nobody should be treated with cruelty, cruelty depends not to be given to anyone. And then the article of that, there are five or one or two articles that is there. In these two articles of that human charter, for the first time the concept of human rights was evolved and accepted by the whole world. And this is the source from which the human rights concept, human rights commissions in India were evolved. This is the source of this, this is the international treaties. And there is a judgment of the order of the Supreme Court, everybody knows it. This is the 13th judgment, given, rendered by 13 judges. Within the human charter was referred to and the human, the concept of human rights, that human rights is the most fundamental rights of everyone. Therefore, a speedy trial, can you see what it was said in Kraswananda Bharati? I may hear mention that while our fundamental rights and directive principles were being fashion and approved by the Constitutional Assembly on December 10, 1948, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The declaration may not be a legally binding instrument, but it shows how India understood the nature of human rights. I may here quote the only the preamble, preamble that I have just shown you before. Now, the next five judges benches, five judges benches of the Ottoman Supreme Court. In the case of Abdul Rehmat Antuleh versus R.S. Nayat. For the students I am trying to say this, these are the very important judgments you must go through. You must go through if you are a student of law, if you are a student of humanities or if you are a student of social sciences. These are the judgments of the honorable Supreme Court, which has set the foundations of human rights, the necessity of human rights as a fundamental rights and it is a now part of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The speedy and fair trial is our fundamental rights. And this theory and this right has been evolved as a fundamental right by these judgements. I am just quoting one, it is a very almost 150 pages long judgment and it has almost 1100 paragraphs. Therefore, you can get it in internet, it is everywhere available. And along with this Abdul Rehmat Antuleh's judgment, one of the most important another judgment reported in 1978, was in 1948, S.K. Manaka Gandhi, when their prime minister, Indra Gandhi, impounded the passport of Manaka Gandhi, her daughter-in-law, then a Surva's file before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court held the right to life, which dignity is a fundamental right under Article 21. And perhaps in my very poor understanding of law, that this is the crux of the whole Indian constitution. This is the heart of the Indian constitution, that right to life. Right to life means it includes right to life with dignity, not an animal existence. And this is the judgments of fine justice ban, it is called constitution ban. And this judgment has evolved the theory of justice delivery system in a fast manner, in a fast straight manner. Next, now question is, what are those cases, which cases shall be handled by the fast straight? Is there any definition that this kind of, only this case will be, this kind of cases will be handled by the fast straight court? There is no definition, there is no bifurcation, there is no schedule, which kind of cases will be taken by the fast straight court? Because of the fact that there is no fast straight court, there is no provision in the CRBC to make a fast straight court. It is a judicially evolved concept. The concept of fast straight court is a judicially evolved concept. Now, when there is a heinous crime against women, basically we are saying, a heinous crime or one Bob Linn saying, heinous crime of murder, very heinous. It cannot be even seen, the pictures of which cannot even be seen in the videos and all. Then what government does, government writes a letter to the high court or high court by slow motor, taking it, writes, passes an order, directing the concentration court to try such measure in a fast straight manner. Now, fast straight means fast straight. It should be concluded in a fast straight, in a fast manner. Is it possible to fix time frame for disposal of a case, criminal case? Is it possible practically? In my understanding it is not possible. And we are talking about the judicial system, we are talking about the trial. What about the investigation? A crime is committed in this place against the women. Police, a file will be lodged, police will come, investigation, forensic experts, forensic reports. Then that's it, issuing someone to the accused, bail, trial, judgements, appeal, revision, review, supreme court. Impossible. It is very lucid and very shooting to our ear that the matter is tried in a fast straight. But to my experience it's not possible because court cannot underestimate or undermine the right of an accused to defend his case. Tomorrow we may be at the receiver's end. Tomorrow I may be firstly implicated in a women's harassment case. The number of cases is not less than a man harassed by a woman. Those kind of, number of those kind of cases are also not less. Therefore the judicial principle in criminal cases, in criminal law is to presume that the accused is innocent until he is killed. And that principles holds the whole thing. Accept, accept the poxso materials. In poxso, poxso means protection of child from sexual offenses. In poxso the presumption is reverse. In poxso cases presumption is that you are guilt. You are the guilty of this offense. Now you prove your innocence. In ordinary criminal cases your innocent prosecution prove his guilt. Therefore proving a case beyond all reasonable doubts in a specified time frame including the investigation, trial, examination of witnesses, judgment, appeal, second appeal in high court, supreme court, SLB. It's a long way to go. Therefore in my humble understanding we can say that reasonably a reasonable time frame can be given to a frustrate court to resolve the case or to come to a conclusion of a trial. A reasonable time. Now it's a very big thing what is reasonableness. Another question arises what is reasonableness? Two years, three years, one year or six months. I have said this to all of you that there is no legal instrument to constitute a frustrate court. It is a judicially evolved practice. Fustrate court functions only when directed by the honorable high court. Yes this is important. Fustrate court does not mean separate court. The same usual court will be burdened by another high voltage case. No infrastructure to handle such cases of linear scram against women in a frustrate court. The same judge who is running with the bundles and bundles of cases will be given one more case to run in a frustrate court. Therefore it makes duty that it makes any sense. It makes no sense at all. This is not the frustrate court. What is a misnomer in my understanding? It is a misnomer. How it is frustrate? You tell me. Bihati Amruk Metro is the busiest district having thousands and thousands of cases. And we are having only seven judicially evolved practices. Seven or ten judicially evolved practices. I believe now in this time. In time. Women knows it. That is why it is the same. There is nothing. Ten judicial officers come to Metro district like 21 inspectors in Bispoor P.S. Isn't it man? 21 assigned Bispoor P.S. Investigation, law and order, VIP duty. What they will do? There was a judgment in 1996 passed by the Supreme Court. Which was directed all the states to separate the investigation wins from the law and order part. It was not complied with. Then Bihati Amruk Metro by my lord Justice B.D. Agrawal passed the judgment in 2013 or 2014. To comply with the order of the honorable Supreme Court. Not done. So making, doing seminar in an AC room is very easier. Giving lectures on the first act court and giving women, talking about women empowerment and delivering justice to women. No. Go to the ground with deeper roots. Where the, where the reason lies. Where the cause lies. When we are suffering from fever we take a procedure. To belute, to lessen the temperature. This is just the treatment of the symptom. Making a seminar on the first act court is a treatment of the symptom. Not the treatment of the disease. This is, this is somewhere else we have to address that. The root cause of the whole thing is lack of infrastructure, lack of judicial office, lack of support in it stuffs. Lack of investigating officers who was given proper training. Ninety percent police officers, police inspectors, inspectors do not know what is cyber crime. Do not know what is FSL. Just six months ago I owned a case. And I was appointed by the High Court to defend the accused person. I owned the case. And I tried while I was coming out of the courtroom. The wife of the main culprit was killed in her house in, in her matrimonial home. Then she was suspended in a tree in the backyard, in the backyard. And trial court convicted the whole family, five percent of the whole family for life. And I reversed, I argued the case in the appeal and I reversed it. And I cried after reversing it. Because I know, I could see from the records that it was a murder. But she was, this those persons was acquitted by the court only because the investigation was faulty. The witnesses did not speak anything about the crime. If we have proper evidence, we do not, should not go for quantity of evidence. We should go for quality of evidence. We need two witnesses. We need two witnesses which can, who should not be turned hostile. So these are the things. Now, I am just concluding my suggestion that we need a legislation for faster court. We need a legislation for faster court. And in this legislation, it will be, it will be mentioned, it will be written, why kind of cases will be taken up by the first court. Impose time prim for disposal of such cases wherever possible. Provide training to judges, public prosecutor, defense counsel, who shall participate in the proceeding of FTC. And with this words, I would like to conclude. And just one data that I collected yesterday, last night, this would be important. I suppose, if I can be given 5 minutes time mode, I would like to give some very important data that I collected yesterday. If I can be given 5 minutes more, I am, I am running sort of time. I know the most important, most important aspect of this, to this seminar is this. Justice population ratio of India. See, what Kiran Rishis who said in the Rajya Sabha. Justice population ratio in India stood at 21.03, that is per million people in 2022. Per million means 10 lakhs, I suppose. One million means 10 lakhs. 21 judges will take the case of 10 lakhs people. What more we require to discuss is the end of everything. Now, see this slide. Bulgaria judges population ratio per lakh. 57, just 57.2 judges over 1 lakh people. In Bulgaria, it's not the development rate. See, United States, 9.3 judges over 1 lakh. 9.8 judges. Mexico, Nicaragua, Sweden, these are all 1 lakh. This is over 1 lakh, not 10 per million. Now, tendency. See the tendency. I have collected this data last night at about 12 o'clock. We have a national judicial data grid. Please note it. National judicial data grid. Every minute the cases are disposed of and filed against women, against men, civil case, criminal case. That national judicial data grid is updating the information every minute. Now, this is the data of last night. See, about 30 year old cases in Assam, see, 24, about 30 years old. And you can have the all India information also. See the tendency. 481,000. Civil and criminal. And 388,725 criminal. Now, I will not club you much. I agree that justice delay is, justice denied. But we should not do hurry. We have to strike out a balance. We have to go through giving reasonable opportunities to the defense also. So, with this few words, I would like to conclude. Thank you for inviting me to the university. Thank you for listening me. I don't have so much of practice in public speaking. Thank you, sir, for your very, very highly insightful elaboration on different pieces of past record. Particularly stemming out from your personal experiences. You have significantly brought up the issues confronting contemporary justice delivery mechanisms, which is also very important for us while developing recommendations on ensuring efficient justice delivery system. Thank you once again, sir.