Law Commission

The Law Commission has recommended amendment to a sub-rule of Code of Civil Procedure to remove an anomaly for the convenience of courts, lawyers, litigants, and the general public. The report "Urgent need to amend Rule 14 (4) of Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908" was submitted to the government earlier this week. In its 18-page report, the Commission, headed by Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi (retd) pointed out that in sub-rule (4) of Rule 14 of Order VII, mention is made of the cross- examination of the plaintiff's witnesses. The words "plaintiff's witnesses" mentioned in sub-rule (4) of Rule 14 of Order VII require to be corrected as "defendant's witnesses", it said. "A plaintiff cannot, except as provided in Section 154 of the Evidence Act, put questions which might be put in cross-examination to his own witnesses. "Sub-rule (3) of Rule 1 of Order XIII also makes the position clear when the expression "cross- examination of the witness of the other party" is employed .

The 22nd law panel was constituted for three years on February 21, 2020 and its chairperson, Justice Rituraj Awasthi (retd), assumed office on November 9, 2022

Ministry unlikely to shelve draft rules, asks commission to submit inputs

A very serious issue that threatens the freedom and security of the country and its citizens, says top court

Govt says freebies inevitably lead to economic disaster

Law Minister says matter on setting up regional branches of Supreme Court is currently sub-judice

The rule of law is a necessary though not a sufficient condition for justice, but our courts are failing to provide even this

The Madras High Court has suggested to the Centre to make the Law Commission of India as a statutory or constitutional body, within six months

The Uttar Pradesh Law Commission is mulling a proposal to bring in a law to check increasing population

The plea, which sought a direction to the Centre to appoint the Chairperson and Members to the 22nd law panel, has also made an alternative prayer urging the top court to do the needful itself

Fundamental rights explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution are being casually eroded in the garb of religious freedom laws

Upadhyay had on February 27 filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in Supreme Court seeking its immediate direction to implement the Law Commission's report on alleged hate and inflammatory speech

BJP leader and lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, in his PIL, has sought a direction to the ministries of home and law and justice to implement the 267th report of the Law Commission on hate speech

The second phase of Swachh Bharat will start soon, Javadekar added

Judicial reforms should happen, finally

The Law Commission analysis assumed that backlog would be cleared up in three years

The government should direct state authorities to set up fast track courts, says the Law Commission.

It is bewildering to note that the judge-population ratio has stood at 18:10 lakh. If the Law Commission had recommended 50 judges in 1987, the report has ostensibly not received government attention. Even the slackness on the part of successive governments both at the Centre and in states in appointing judges commensurate with the growing number of cases has rendered the judiciary to go on slow in disposal of cases. If the judges' strength is 18 for every 10 lakhs, it doesn't mean there is pressure on 18 judges to handle 10 lakh cases. The reports must reveal the ratio of judges to the pendency of cases. The litigant public in need of justice is scared to moving courts considering the inordinate delay expected in disposal of cases. The governments have an obligation to do away with this fear. For this to happen, an adequate number of judges must be appointed, more courts has to be set up, excessive adjournments should be eliminated, court holidays must be curtailed besides a number of