The basic structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution is a judicial innovation. Discuss.
![[Deleted User]](https://mainsanswerwriting.com/wp-content/plugins/WPQA/images/default-image.png "[Deleted User]"){kind=avatar}
The judiciary plays important role in Indian democracy and acts as the guardian of the Constitution. It is also entrusted with the responsibility of upholding the rule of law. It protects our fundamental rights and enables citizens to have recourse against the other branches of Government – the execRead more
The judiciary plays important role in Indian democracy and acts as the guardian of the Constitution. It is also entrusted with the responsibility of upholding the rule of law. It protects our fundamental rights and enables citizens to have recourse against the other branches of Government – the executive and legislative – through judicial review. Without this balance, one organ would reign supreme.
Independence is essential for a judiciary to function effectively. Judges are appointed through a transparent process and cannot be easily swayed by political expediencies. Our apex court has given many landmark decisions including in Kesavanand Bharati’s case that reiterated that some parts of the Constitution are beyond Parliament’s jurisdiction to amend.
Moreover access to justice has been widened through Public Interest Litigation. Under PIL even an ordinary citizen can approach the court on matters of public question and seek justice. This has brought in democratisation of legal process whereby voiceless people could also have access to courts, so too by the marginalised.
However, there are serious challenges which have emerged recently and which could be seen as undermining efficiency of judiciary as these relates to very concerns about delays but they direly affect possibility of timely justice.
Yet, there are some very serious challenges that have surfaced in recent past and which if looked at actually do reduce efficiency of judiciary when matters relating to the said delay itself but then these do drastically reduce even the probability of timely justice.
See less
Yes, an FIR can be filed by the accused but the admissibility of such an FIR in court as a confession is a tangled issue, completely depending on the set of circumstances of the case. Admissibility as a Confession: Generally, an FIR filed by an accused is not admissible in the court as a confession.Read more
Yes, an FIR can be filed by the accused but the admissibility of such an FIR in court as a confession is a tangled issue, completely depending on the set of circumstances of the case.
Admissibility as a Confession:
Generally, an FIR filed by an accused is not admissible in the court as a confession. This is due to the following reasons:
1. Voluntariness: A confession should be voluntary and shall be made free from duress or any sort of inducement to be taking as admissible. An FIR filed by an accused does not fall under this category especially at times of coercion or pressure.
2. Warning: Any confession that may have taken place that was recorded would have a proper warning administered before taking such confession due to the ill effects of false confession. An FIR filed by an accused may not have undergone this stage.
3. Self-Incrimination: Thus, the right of every incriminated person not to be self-incriminated is restricted by the filing of an FIR. However, it should be ensured that voluntary statements are not induced or coerced to hold up before this court.
Meaning, an FIR can be filed, but predominantly it will be without evidentiary value. The court would have to look at what circumstances were there under which the FIR was filed, the voluntary nature of the statements, and whether or not procedural safeguards were followed.
See less