Justice delayed is justice denied
Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all. This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because it is unfair for the injured party to have to sustain the injury with little hope for resolution. The phrase has become a rallying cry for legal reformers who view courts or governments as acting too slowly in resolving legal issues either because the existing system is too complex or overburdened, or because the issue or party in question lacks political favor.  Origin
There are conflicting accounts of who first noted the phrase. According to Respectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations, it is attributable to William Ewart Gladstone but such attribution was not verifiable. Alternatively, it may be attributable to William Penn, although not in its current form. The phrase may alternatively be traced to the Magna Carta, clause 40 of which reads, "To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice." The reason one goes to court is to get justice, and "Justice Delayed is Justice Denied" As Chief Justice Warren E. Burger noted: "A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people and three things could destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgment of its value; that people who have long been exploited in the smaller transactions of daily life come to believe that courts cannot vindicate their legal rights from fraud and over-reaching; that people come to believe the law - in the larger sense - cannot fulfill its primary function to protect them and their families in their homes, at their work, and on the public streets." Example:
I am not a judicial expert to state on the Indian Judiciary ,But being a citizen of India ...I can share my views on the judicial System that common people need to depend on to gain justice in the nation. A vast nation which works under a single unilateral judicial system never worked in India The slowness of India’s court system can be stated with an example, the trials in 1993 Mumbai serial bomb blasts took about 13 years ... the slow trial showed how the Indian judiciary system failed to punish the real culprits behind the blast....100 culprits are still missing including the main conspirators and masterminds of the attacks – Tiger Memon and Dawood Ibrahim.The primary charge sheet for case was framed nearly eight months after the incident in November 1993, the court delivered judgment only on September 12, 2006. The recent 26/11 2008 mumbai blast case...the trial finished on .On 6 May 2010, Kasab the main accused arrested was sentenced to death.It took about 2years for a huge case of National Importance to get over ....So what will be the condition of Ordinary cases from common people ....There are over 40000 cases backlog in the Supreme court alone...3,287,037 civil cases and 704,214 criminal cases are pending in various high courts in India.The list would go into millions if we check on lower courts. The judicial system is highly biased ,expensive and always a dream for poor people...An ordinary man cannot waste his money and time running case which would proceed throughout his life time and sometimes beyond it.Now its corruption that's haunting lower trial courts .......If you have money you win cases ...even if you are the culprit. The Government should review the judicial system ...setting up a few fast track courts and mobile courts will not solve the problem ...the entire system should be changed for fast track justice ....and the cost of running...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document