Anil Agrawal (Retired) 04 January 2009

Punishment for Magistrates

What is the logic of crime and punishment? The one who commits crime must be punished. Magistrate does not directly commit a crime in sending an innocent person to jail who is acquitted after 5 years on appeal. Now, who is responsible for loss of earning, years, reputation, and stigma? Passing strictures and making entries in the report of the Magistrate will not wash off the damage done to the person. All that he may suffer is that he may not be elevated to the next post. Why should the magistrates be also not held accountable for their action vis-a-vis accused? If they cannot evaluate evidence and proof, they are not fit to hold the post they are holding. May be no country has this system. There are cases where a man is behind the bars without trial for years, without bail. Who is responsible for this state of affairs? Time has come to review the whole administration of justice. It cannot always bee the holy cow.

Reply Follow

9 Replies

PALNITKAR V.V. (Lawyer) 04 January 2009

The Magistrate should be sacked if he does not know the law. If mistakes are bonafide then one can understand. but if they are not bonafide then he deserves punishment

PALNITKAR V.V. (Lawyer) 04 January 2009

The Magistrate should be sacked if he does not know the law. If mistakes are bonafide then one can understand. but if they are not bonafide then he deserves punishment

PALNITKAR V.V. (Lawyer) 04 January 2009

The Magistrate should be sacked if he does not know the law. If mistakes are bonafide then one can understand. but if they are not bonafide then he deserves punishment

RAKHI BUDHIRAJA ADVOCATE (LAWYER AT BUDHIRAJA & ASSOCIATES SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) 05 January 2009

I do agree with Mr. palnitkar. He is absolutely right.

Anil Agrawal (Retired) 05 January 2009

What punishment? He should be punished to suffer imprisonment for the period that he had convicted the person who was found innocent.

Rajan Salvi (Lawyer) 09 January 2009

It is taken for granted that the lower courts will commit mistakes and hence the provisions of appeals, revisions , etc and hence hierarchy of courts. Regarding acquittal, it is not always because the person is innocent , but it is for 'benefit of doubt' ' insuffiency of evidence' ' no proof beyond reasonable doubt' etc.

B.B.R.Goud. ( Faculty) 24 February 2009

Yes, they should also to be punished, in accordance with the rule of law.

the existing law is not sufficient and strong enough to punish the judiciary.

but it can only possible through a suitable legislation, which is very difficult, unless and until the legislature is shielded by such judiciary vice versa.

Anil Agrawal (Retired) 26 February 2009

I know that magistrates shall never be punished. The Government of the day will collapse. Those lawyeers who practise in towns and cities just don't know the conditions obtaining in mofussil areas in the matter of lower judiciary.

Rajesh Kumar (Advocate) 03 March 2009

Law never protects persons who sleeps over their rights.

If magistrate has done something wrong, the aggrieved person should take steps. Write letters to Chief Justice, government. Write in newspapers, may be even pamphlates outside magistrate court. Express yourself.

If you can prosecute the person, prosecute. Do whatever you can do. Right or wrong- whatever you deem fit. When the law does not allow you to take right steps, wrong steps is justified. That is what is called civil disobedience.

Just dont sleep over your rights.