Defining justice has never been easy as there is always an element of subjectivity in the concept. Understanding the idea of justice may be only a little less daunting than verifying the number of stars in our galaxy. If the latter ranges from 100 to 400 billion, the number of definitions of justice are only slightly less astronomical as they, too, range from 7 to 8 billion. Every individual has at least one definition of justice, depending on his or her experience and interpretation of that experience. Sometime, the same person can have a different idea in different situation. The one thing that can be said about the idea of justice is that it is continuously evolving. Naturally, the law must also change to keep pace with the changing connotations of justice. Law is the tool that the society has developed to dispense justice. However, the pace of change of law is not in tandem with the changing idea of justice. One case in point is the proposed change in the law to try minors as adults. It is only after the serious public outcry that a change in Juvenile Justice Law is being felt. It was always evident that heinous and serious crimes committed by technically Juvenile offenders needed to be treated as adult crimes. The rising number of cases involving juveniles in premeditated heinous crimes were alarming, hence the punishment needed to be the same as that given to an adult. However, there are many other issues involving the question of law, justice and fairness which need serious consideration. The one, and most rampant, issue is the act of instituting false criminal cases on innocent people to harass, intimidate or sometimes even force compliance for achieving wrong ends. The key issue in these cases is the over reliance on eye witnesses. Any person with criminal intent can find out two or three witnesses and file a case against any unsuspecting person in order to gain unlawful advantage. There is an ancient Indian village proverb saying that to settle scores don’t go for a civil suit or “Diwani”. Rather, go far a criminal case, which is termed “Faujdari”. The unfortunate part is that even in this technology driven 21st century the trick works. The courts are aware of this hard reality, but precious little has been achieved. It is time to make amends. For some five centuries the Lady Justice has been standing as a blind-folded statuette with a balance in one hand and sword in the other. It is time the blindfold is removed. The allegorical personification of the moral force in the judicial system needs a rethink as justice is being derailed by the unscrupulous who have the wherewithal. Justice can certainly be more impartial if Lady Justice can see the faces of evil with her own eyes. From King Solomon to Suddhodana to Vikramaditya to Ranjit Singh history has many examples. They relied more on wisdom, conscience and judgment rather than evidences of witnesses of doubtful virtue and were able to dispense justice. Atop the old Bailey Courthouse of London the Lady Justice stands without blindfold, perhaps to suggest this. The crowding at top courts is more due to motivated concoctions rather than any genuine grouse. Public opinion as John Galsworthy said is always in advance of law. Public is now feeling the pinch.

Pathak is a professor of management, writer, and an acclaimed public speaker. He can be reached at ppathak.ism@gmail.com