Is the Indian Constitution a federal structure ?

 Why is it in the news?

Hon’ble Shri DY Chandrachud, the Chief Justice of India, while delivering inaugural Lok Satta lecture in Mumbai on 26th October, said “States and union are both creatures of the constitution. They must act in deference to their legislative boundaries in finding meaningful solutions to modern day problems. Our ability to address these challenges is the litmus test for our imperfect federalism and the framers’ faith in it. If federalism in the years gone by was about adjusting to political realities in terms of legislative powers, in the years to come should be evaluated based on its ability to foster democracy and constitutional ideals of equality, liberty, dignity and fraternity. “

Introduction

The Indian Constitution does not use the word federation. Instead, it uses the term union. Article 1 says that India, that is , Bharat shall be a union of states. It means that unlike federation, the central government is not the outcome of agreement among federating units. Secondly,  the federating units have no right to secede from the central government. However, the Indian constitution postulates a federation with a centralising tendency. In the Bommai case (1994), the Supreme Court laid down that the constitution of India is federal and federalism is its basic feature. The court held that the states have independent constitutional existence. They are not subordinates or agents of the centre. Within the sphere allotted to them, states are supreme. 

What is Federalism ?

1.Federalism pre-supposes a dual government where both central and the state governments derive their power from the constitution. The power is divided between the national and state governments with clear boundaries. Secondly, it has a written constitution where both central and state governments have defined jurisdictions.  An independent judiciary which acts as the guardian of the constitution. Bicameral legislature is established whereby the second chamber represents the interests of the states. Federalism pre-supposes a rigid constitution so that no constitutional amendment can be made by ordinary legislation. In a federal structure, supremacy of the constitution is of paramount importance and thus, whenever Parliament or State legislature exceeds its power or does not conform to the provisions of the constitution, the laws passed by the Parliament or state assemblies are struck down. 

2.On the contrary, in a unitary government, all powers are vested in the central government. Moreover, the central government creates regional governments like in the UK. 

Federal features of the Indian Constitution

1.The constitution of India establishes a dual polity consisting of the union and state governments. At present, there are 28 states. They have been assigned powers separately. They are not subordinate to the Union Government. While, the Union Government deals with foreign, defence, currency, communication and so on the state governments have been bestowed with to work for regional interests like public order, agriculture, health, local self government, police etc. 

2. The Seventh Schedule of the constitution of India consists of three lists - The Union List comprising 100 subjects, the State List comprising 59 subjects and the Concurrent List comprising 52 subjects. Both the central and state governments can make laws on the subjects included in the concurrent list. But in case of any conflict, the laws made by the Parliament would supersede the laws made by state assemblies under concurrent lists. However, unlike the US constitution, the residuary subjects are vested in the central government. 

3.Our constitution clearly gives its supremacy. Thus, in case the Parliament or State Legislature exceeds its powers or its limitations, the laws passed by the legislature or parliament are declared null and void by the Supreme Court under judicial review. 

4. Ours is a written constitution. The constitution was drafted and prepared by the constituent assembly represented by 299 members from the nook and corner of the country. It contains 470 articles and 12 schedules. The constitution has clearly discussed and demarcated  the structures and functions of the central, state and local governments. 

5.Our constitution is a mixture of flexibility and rigidity. While some of the provisions of the constitution can be amended by both Houses of the Parliament with special majority, the federal structure like the central state relations, judiciary, inter-state commerce can only be amended by both Houses of Parliament and  the concurrence of half of the state legislature by the simple majority. 

6. Our constitution has made provisions for an independent judiciary by securing the tenures of judges, fixed conditions of service and independence from the executive. It has also been assigned the task to settle the disputes between the union and the state governments or between state governments. 

7. Our constitution lays down a bicameral legislature consisting of an Upper House (Rajya Sabha) and a Lower House (Lok Sabha). While the Lower House is elected on the basis of universal suffrage, the Upper House is represented by states to protect their interests.  

8.The judicial intervention by the Supreme Court further strengthened the federal features of our constitution. For example, the Supreme Court held that a bill passed by the state legislature and presented before the Governor for his assent, cannot withhold the bill indefinitely. Rather a Governor can withhold with the assent of the bill only to send it for reconsideration, thereby circumscribing the discretionary power of the Governor.   Similarly, in the Bommai case (1994), the Supreme Court held that the test of the majority can only be held at the floor of the House, thereby, limiting the misuse of article 356 by the Governor for the imposition of  the President’s Rule in the state. 

9. Assertion of autonomy by states, demand for more financial grants by the states from the divisible pool of the central proceeds, disputes between states over the sharing of river water, territorial disputes between different states, creation of new states and finally emergence of regional parties to reduce regional disparities and for balanced regional development are some of the important federal trends that are being reflected in the working of the constitution of India for the last 75 years. 

Centralising features of the constitution of India  

There are certain centralising features which contrast the Indian constitution from the US constitution in so far as  the federal features are concerned. These are 

• Emergency Provisions under articles 352, 356 and 360

• Integrated judiciary 

• All India Services 

• Integrated audit system

• Integrated election commission

• Appointment/ Powers and Functions of Governor

• Parliament's authority even in the matters relating to the state list

• Single citizenship 

• Single constitution

• No equality of state representation in the Rajya Sabha

• More powers to the union government than state governments 

• The President enjoys absolute veto over state bills 

Conclusion

1. The Indian constitution postulates cooperative federalism where the union and state governments work together to iron out the differences that arise in governance to achieve the common goal of development. 

2. The states are in no way dependent upon the centre for the legislative or the executive authority. Both the centre and the state derive their power from the constitution itself. 

3.However, to strengthen the unity and integrity of India, certain exceptional provisions were made to face the challenges in abnormal/ exceptional situations so that in case of emergencies , India acts as a single powerful body. That’s why provisions of emergency, flexibility in the amendment of the constitution and a strong central government have been made. 

Why do courts acquit criminals/accused?

 

Why do courts acquit criminals/accused?

Why is it in the news?

As per the news item published in the reputed Newspaper at Indore, the court acquitted three accused charged with murder and kidnapping of a 13 year old son of a medical shop owner. It was contended that most of the witnesses turned hostile and so the court acquitted the accused. The mother of the dead son was in the precinct of the court and she started sobbing but the accused came out with their smiling faces. Thus, the boy, who was killed, did not get justice even after his death.

Introduction

1.Once a crime is committed, the Police register FIR. Investigation goes on. 

• The investigation of an offence consists of proceeding of the investigating officer to the spot, ascertainment of facts and circumstances of the case, discovery and arrest of the suspected offenders, the examinations of various accused and the search of places or seizure of things considered necessary for the investigation and finally, formation of the opinion as to whether on the basis of materials collected, there is a case to present accused before the magistrate for trials and if so, taking the necessary steps by filing of a charge sheet under section 173 of crpc.

2.If there is sufficient evidence, the investigating officer produces a charge sheet in the court. The court starts the trial proceedings whereby examination chief, cross examination and re-examination of the witnesses, complainants and accused take place. The relevant documents are exhibited in the court of law before the accused. The Judge either convicts or acquits the accused on the basis of evidence brought before him. 

3.If there is sufficient evidence, the court convicts the accused as per the provision of Indian Penal court. If the court is not satisfied with the evidence brought before it, it may acquit the accused. 

Causes of the acquittal of the accused 

The acquittal of an accused can be attributed to the complexities of so many factors. These are -

• Insufficient evidence- If the prosecution fails to establish the guilt of the accused on the basis of insufficient evidence incriminating the accused, the court can acquit an accused. 

• Reasonable doubt- It is the duty of prosecution to prove the involvement of the accused in the crime beyond reasonable doubt. If the defence successfully introduces doubt about the involvement of the accused in the case, the court can give a verdict in favour of the accused by acquitting him. 

• Illegal evidence - If the court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has obtained evidence unlawfully, it may not admit that illegal evidence in the court and this may lead to acquittal of the accused.

• False confessions - If defence proves that the confession of the accused was obtained by coercion, temptation, allurement or under duress, the court may not admit those confessions by the accused and this may lead to acquittal.

• Credibility of witnesses - If witnesses are inconsistent, biased , and their statements are contradicted by other evidence, it may create scepticism in the mind of the judge and he may acquit the accused because of the lack of accuracy among witnesses. 

• Failure in identification of unknown accused and stolen goods may lead to acquittal of accused.

• Alibi - If the defence successfully establishes the fact that the accused were far off from the place of occurrence of crime and it was not humanly possible to reach the place where the crime occurred, the court may presume that the accused are not involved in the commission of crime.

• If the expert testimony is challenged by the defence and their methodology or expert testimony is successfully impeached, the court may presume that the expert's testimony were vitiated and so it may acquit the accused. 

• Lack of jurisdiction- on account of lack of jurisdiction, the court can also acquit and accuse.

• Statutes of limitations -  The law dictates a specific time limit within which charges must be found. If the prosecution brings charges after the statute of limitation has expired, the accused may be acquitted due to the legal time limit. 

• Poor investigation - Investigation is the process of linking the chain of circumstances under which the crime occurred and the crime detected. If the Investigating Officer fails to establish the link of the occurrence and the detection of the crime and if there is a missing link, the court may acquit the accused. 

• Procedural violations - failure to adhere to legal procedure during evidence collection, statement of witnesses, arrest, searches can render evidence inadmissible in the court. 

• Political influence - Pressure from higher authorities or political masters can compromise the independence and impartiality of the investigation leading to the acquittal of the accused. 

• Resourceful and powerful accused - Sometimes accused are so powerful politically and economically that they exert enormous pressure upon witnesses, the police and the court. Moreover, these powerful accused hire reputed lawyers to defend their case. While the complainant and his government advocate can not match the legal knowledge and expertise of defence lawyers. This leads to the acquittal of the accused. 

• In addition, lack of expertise of the investigating officer, procedural violation, inadequate training and prejudice of the investigating officer are other factors for the acquittal of accused. 

Impact of acquittal of the accused on the society 

Society is disturbed whenever wrongful convictions take place or guilty individuals are acquitted. This leads to the erosion of public trust in law enforcement. The confidence of people in the criminal justice system is also shaken. Law and order situation worsens. Anarchy prevails. The prestige of police ebbs in the eyes of people. 

Conclusion

Acquittals of an accused occur on account of several factors. It is therefore pertinent that the comprehensive legal procedure is followed. The rights of the accused are safeguarded. The evidence is collected and scrutinised before producing them into the court of law so that the court can trust them. It must be remembered that as per the jurisprudence, every accused is innocent until proven guilty by the court. Efforts should be made to cross examine witnesses and accused in such a way that the court is satisfied with the collection of evidence and its authenticity.