INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH CULTURE SOCIETY ISSN: 2456-6683 Volume - 3, Issue - 3, Mar – 2019
Monthly, Peer-Reviewed, Refereed, Indexed Journal Impact Factor: 4.526 Publication Date: 31/03/2019
AN ANALYSIS OF MALIMATH COMMITTEE REPORT ON
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN PERSPECTIVE OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Rupaben Mukundbhai Tailor
Research Scholar, Department of Law,
Veer Narmad South Gujarat Unversity, Surat, India.
Email –
Abstract: The purpose of the study is to analyse the recommendations done by the Malimath Committee to amend
such Criminal Laws prevails in Criminal Justice System in India. It is directly or indirectly helpful to know that if
such recommendations will be implemented how they will affect the human rights. This current study is mainly
focused on the human rights perspective. Therefore, only those recommendations are focused for the analysis. This
study is also helpful to the students, academicians, legislatures, lawyers and society to know the effect if the
recommendations would be implemented in the criminal justice system of India. This study is based on doctrinal
method.
Key Words: Criminal Justice System, Human Rights, police, courts, etc.
1. INTRODUCTION:
The basis of the criminal law is to seek protection of the right to life and personal liberty and other fundamental
rights as well as human rights against the public at large and state under the rule of law. Therefore, there should be
balance of the rights given to the offenders and victims of the crime and safety to the society as well as to prevent the
crimes in criminal justice system.
The Malimath Committee was established in the year of 2000 by the Home Ministry of India. When the
committee was formed the reasons for constituting the committee were not stated in the notification. It only said that,
“to consider measures for revamping the criminal justice system”.1 This indicates that the present criminal justice system
is meagre and suffering from two extreme issues. Firstly, the huge pendency of cases and delay in justice; secondly, low
rate of conviction in criminal cases.
The committee had initiated with several objects to amend the Criminal Procedure Code of India, Indian Penal
Code, Indian Evidence Act and if there is a need of the hour, to amend the provisions of Constitution of India regarding
to criminal jurisprudence; to simplify and to make speedy judicial procedure; for restoring the faith and confidence of
the general public; to make accountable judiciary, police and prosecutors. This report has been submitted in 2003 with
the various recommendations to modify the criminal laws and criminal justice system to meet their objectives.
2. WHAT IS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM?
Criminal Justice System is an instrument of social control which consist the government agencies charged with
enforcing law and order and adjudicating crime. The aims of the CJS are as below:
To prevent incidence of crime
To punish the criminals
To reorient the criminals
For providing the recompense to the victims
To maintain law and order in the society
To frighten the wrongdoers
On the basis of objectives it can be said that the mainstay of criminal justice system are the community, the law
enforcement, the prosecution and the court.
Criminal justice system can be classified in two parts viz., Adversarial Criminal Justice System and Inquisitorial
Criminal Justice System. India follows the adversarial criminal justice system which is established by the British on the
basis of their common law. This system is based on two principles one is to presume innocent of accused and second is
that prosecution has to prove his case above all reasonable doubts. Inquisitorial system is based on an actively
participation of all agencies of government for truth finding.
3. THE MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS OF MALIMATH COMMITTEE:
The committee has recommends numbers of reforms in Criminal Procedure Code, Indian Evidence Act, Indian
Penal Code, Etc. to meet their objectives. Some major recommendations are here as under:
Available online on - WWW.IJRCS.ORG Page 71
, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH CULTURE SOCIETY ISSN: 2456-6683 Volume - 3, Issue - 3, Mar – 2019
Monthly, Peer-Reviewed, Refereed, Indexed Journal Impact Factor: 4.526 Publication Date: 31/03/2019
3.1 Reforms regarding detainees:
The committee has recommended that sec.167 of Cr.P.C., which provides the provision regarding remand that
period of remand should be increased from 15 to 30 days in those cases where the punishment is more than 5
years.
Sec. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act provides the provision regarding the confession. The section says that any
confession made to a police officer shall not be admissible as evidence in a court. The committee has
recommended that this section should be reformed and incorporate the sec. 32 of POTA and Sec. 15 of TADA,
which provided that the confession made to the superintendent of police or the officer of above rank, whether
it is audio or video- record, whether the person is in custody or not, is admissible as evidence in court. Although
the person has right to counsel.
The Identification of Prisoners Act 1920 should be amended on the basis of sec. 27 of POTA. This reform will
authorised to take fingerprints, saliva, footprints, hair, photographs, semen, blood samples etc. for DNA and if
the accused denied for it, the authority can make adverse inference against him. Moreover, the words are used
in sec. 27 that such samples shall be collected “through a medical practitioner or otherwise”.
3.2 Reforms regarding Fair Trial:
The committee has proposed that the time period of filing Charge-sheet should be increased from 90 days to
180 days. If the charge-sheet is not filed within the time, detainee must be released on bail.
The committee recommends that the accused should be questioned by free will of court for finding the truth
and relevant information. If accused refused to give information court should have drawn the adverse inference
against the accused.
The committee has recommends that sec. 54 of the Indian Evidence Act should be amended which provides
that previous conviction of accused should be considered as “Bad character” and it should be relevant in
criminal proceedings. The present provision provides that the previous bad character of accused is not relevant.
The accused is only bind to give the evidence of his good character when the prosecution is able to give
evidence of bad character.
The committee has recommended that the defendant has to defend him/herself on the early stage of trial even
with the weak defence. If the response of the defence is vague, general or devoid of material, the court may
give the opportunity to the accused to rectify the statement after that court shall deem that the allegation is not
denied.
The committee has recommended that the standard of proof should be reduced to increase the conviction. The
view about “prosecution has to prove their case beyond the reasonable doubts” should change.
The committee has recommended that the procedure of summary trail prescribed in sec. 262-264 of Cr.P.C.
should be amended to make process speedy. Moreover, the maximum punishment of three months should be
increased to three years in summary trails. The committee has also recommended that when the witness has
wilfully or knowingly gave the false or fabricated evidence before the court, the court should try summarily.
The present law stipulates that the court has discretionary power to choose the process.
The committee has recommended some provisions to include in IPC, Cr.P.C., Evidence Act of India of POTA
and TADA which will lead to the generalization of special laws with addition of safeguards. Further, the
committee suggest that the definition of terrorist acts, disruptive activities and organized crimes should be
included inclusively and comprehensively.
The committee has suggested that the cruelty made under sec. 498A of IPC should be made compoundable as
well as bailable.
Further, the committee suggested that there should be a “Director of Prosecution”. Such post should be filled up
from the rank of “Director General of Police”.
4. RECOMMENDATIONS V/S HUMAN RIGHTS:
India is the signatory party of many covenants, conventions and declarations etc. of human rights. Therefore,
India obliged to obey those international standards of human rights. In this section, how the above recommendations are
not according with the international standard of human rights have been analysed.
The first recommendation is about to increase the detention and justification is given that investigation of serious
crime is not possible within 15 days. If the time of detention would be increased, it will make the detainees more
vulnerable. In India, there are numbers of cases of torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by
police authority. Further, India is the signatory party of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment but has not ratified yet. India is the signatory party of ICCPR and article 4
of the said covenant states that the right against the torture cannot be suspended and prohibition is absolute even
Available online on - WWW.IJRCS.ORG Page 72
Monthly, Peer-Reviewed, Refereed, Indexed Journal Impact Factor: 4.526 Publication Date: 31/03/2019
AN ANALYSIS OF MALIMATH COMMITTEE REPORT ON
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN PERSPECTIVE OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Rupaben Mukundbhai Tailor
Research Scholar, Department of Law,
Veer Narmad South Gujarat Unversity, Surat, India.
Email –
Abstract: The purpose of the study is to analyse the recommendations done by the Malimath Committee to amend
such Criminal Laws prevails in Criminal Justice System in India. It is directly or indirectly helpful to know that if
such recommendations will be implemented how they will affect the human rights. This current study is mainly
focused on the human rights perspective. Therefore, only those recommendations are focused for the analysis. This
study is also helpful to the students, academicians, legislatures, lawyers and society to know the effect if the
recommendations would be implemented in the criminal justice system of India. This study is based on doctrinal
method.
Key Words: Criminal Justice System, Human Rights, police, courts, etc.
1. INTRODUCTION:
The basis of the criminal law is to seek protection of the right to life and personal liberty and other fundamental
rights as well as human rights against the public at large and state under the rule of law. Therefore, there should be
balance of the rights given to the offenders and victims of the crime and safety to the society as well as to prevent the
crimes in criminal justice system.
The Malimath Committee was established in the year of 2000 by the Home Ministry of India. When the
committee was formed the reasons for constituting the committee were not stated in the notification. It only said that,
“to consider measures for revamping the criminal justice system”.1 This indicates that the present criminal justice system
is meagre and suffering from two extreme issues. Firstly, the huge pendency of cases and delay in justice; secondly, low
rate of conviction in criminal cases.
The committee had initiated with several objects to amend the Criminal Procedure Code of India, Indian Penal
Code, Indian Evidence Act and if there is a need of the hour, to amend the provisions of Constitution of India regarding
to criminal jurisprudence; to simplify and to make speedy judicial procedure; for restoring the faith and confidence of
the general public; to make accountable judiciary, police and prosecutors. This report has been submitted in 2003 with
the various recommendations to modify the criminal laws and criminal justice system to meet their objectives.
2. WHAT IS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM?
Criminal Justice System is an instrument of social control which consist the government agencies charged with
enforcing law and order and adjudicating crime. The aims of the CJS are as below:
To prevent incidence of crime
To punish the criminals
To reorient the criminals
For providing the recompense to the victims
To maintain law and order in the society
To frighten the wrongdoers
On the basis of objectives it can be said that the mainstay of criminal justice system are the community, the law
enforcement, the prosecution and the court.
Criminal justice system can be classified in two parts viz., Adversarial Criminal Justice System and Inquisitorial
Criminal Justice System. India follows the adversarial criminal justice system which is established by the British on the
basis of their common law. This system is based on two principles one is to presume innocent of accused and second is
that prosecution has to prove his case above all reasonable doubts. Inquisitorial system is based on an actively
participation of all agencies of government for truth finding.
3. THE MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS OF MALIMATH COMMITTEE:
The committee has recommends numbers of reforms in Criminal Procedure Code, Indian Evidence Act, Indian
Penal Code, Etc. to meet their objectives. Some major recommendations are here as under:
Available online on - WWW.IJRCS.ORG Page 71
, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH CULTURE SOCIETY ISSN: 2456-6683 Volume - 3, Issue - 3, Mar – 2019
Monthly, Peer-Reviewed, Refereed, Indexed Journal Impact Factor: 4.526 Publication Date: 31/03/2019
3.1 Reforms regarding detainees:
The committee has recommended that sec.167 of Cr.P.C., which provides the provision regarding remand that
period of remand should be increased from 15 to 30 days in those cases where the punishment is more than 5
years.
Sec. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act provides the provision regarding the confession. The section says that any
confession made to a police officer shall not be admissible as evidence in a court. The committee has
recommended that this section should be reformed and incorporate the sec. 32 of POTA and Sec. 15 of TADA,
which provided that the confession made to the superintendent of police or the officer of above rank, whether
it is audio or video- record, whether the person is in custody or not, is admissible as evidence in court. Although
the person has right to counsel.
The Identification of Prisoners Act 1920 should be amended on the basis of sec. 27 of POTA. This reform will
authorised to take fingerprints, saliva, footprints, hair, photographs, semen, blood samples etc. for DNA and if
the accused denied for it, the authority can make adverse inference against him. Moreover, the words are used
in sec. 27 that such samples shall be collected “through a medical practitioner or otherwise”.
3.2 Reforms regarding Fair Trial:
The committee has proposed that the time period of filing Charge-sheet should be increased from 90 days to
180 days. If the charge-sheet is not filed within the time, detainee must be released on bail.
The committee recommends that the accused should be questioned by free will of court for finding the truth
and relevant information. If accused refused to give information court should have drawn the adverse inference
against the accused.
The committee has recommends that sec. 54 of the Indian Evidence Act should be amended which provides
that previous conviction of accused should be considered as “Bad character” and it should be relevant in
criminal proceedings. The present provision provides that the previous bad character of accused is not relevant.
The accused is only bind to give the evidence of his good character when the prosecution is able to give
evidence of bad character.
The committee has recommended that the defendant has to defend him/herself on the early stage of trial even
with the weak defence. If the response of the defence is vague, general or devoid of material, the court may
give the opportunity to the accused to rectify the statement after that court shall deem that the allegation is not
denied.
The committee has recommended that the standard of proof should be reduced to increase the conviction. The
view about “prosecution has to prove their case beyond the reasonable doubts” should change.
The committee has recommended that the procedure of summary trail prescribed in sec. 262-264 of Cr.P.C.
should be amended to make process speedy. Moreover, the maximum punishment of three months should be
increased to three years in summary trails. The committee has also recommended that when the witness has
wilfully or knowingly gave the false or fabricated evidence before the court, the court should try summarily.
The present law stipulates that the court has discretionary power to choose the process.
The committee has recommended some provisions to include in IPC, Cr.P.C., Evidence Act of India of POTA
and TADA which will lead to the generalization of special laws with addition of safeguards. Further, the
committee suggest that the definition of terrorist acts, disruptive activities and organized crimes should be
included inclusively and comprehensively.
The committee has suggested that the cruelty made under sec. 498A of IPC should be made compoundable as
well as bailable.
Further, the committee suggested that there should be a “Director of Prosecution”. Such post should be filled up
from the rank of “Director General of Police”.
4. RECOMMENDATIONS V/S HUMAN RIGHTS:
India is the signatory party of many covenants, conventions and declarations etc. of human rights. Therefore,
India obliged to obey those international standards of human rights. In this section, how the above recommendations are
not according with the international standard of human rights have been analysed.
The first recommendation is about to increase the detention and justification is given that investigation of serious
crime is not possible within 15 days. If the time of detention would be increased, it will make the detainees more
vulnerable. In India, there are numbers of cases of torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by
police authority. Further, India is the signatory party of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment but has not ratified yet. India is the signatory party of ICCPR and article 4
of the said covenant states that the right against the torture cannot be suspended and prohibition is absolute even
Available online on - WWW.IJRCS.ORG Page 72
