The Judicial Evolution Of Appointment Of Commissions

1496 Words6 Pages
The system would lead to grave injustice particularly in case where the parties to the litigation are not balanced in economic strength. The litigants belonging to un privileged segment of the society are bound to be at a disadvantage as against an economically strong opponent under the adversarial system because difficulty in securing a competent legal representation also due to inability to produce relevant pieces of evidence before the courts. Hence, when approached the courts for enforcement of their FRs, it became necessary to lay down new procedure, to make this possible by the courts. New tools were forged “for making the FRs meaningful to the large segments of people”. So in cases where poor litigants or citizens bona fide approached the courts, they could not expect the formers to produce relevant material before them in support of their case. The adoption of a passive approach and declining to intervene would render FRs “a teasing illusion” for such litigants. The appropriate answer was the judicial evolution of appointment of commissions for gathering facts and data with respect to a complaint of a violation of a FR made on behalf of weaker segments. Consequent reports of commissioners appointed will furnish prima facie evidence the relevant facts and information gathered by the commissioners and that is the case why such commissioners would have to be responsible individuals; who enjoys the confidence of the court for making an inquiry into the facts of the case
Open Document