People have cried enough, it is time the Judges cried!

We learn from others and live. When we stop learning, we die. Our judicial system was the gift of Britishers and it had remained so for the last 200 odd years. We have not adapted the system to the needs of growing population and have not even bothered to look around. All under the impression that Courts are holy cows, which was wrong. The immunity and total independence in action has made our judges inherently feel that they are not ordinary mortals like the MPs or even Prime Minister or President who are susceptible to the whims and fancies of ordinary mortals, but some divine powers whose opinions should be heard in silence without comment, obeyed and punishment carried out without question. They are the only kind of species which lords over its creators and demands their  unquestionable loyalty. Just as we do not hear any adverse comment about the ruling elite till they are in power for fear of retribution, we are also expected to be and are mute spectators to the shenanigans going on in the judiciary till the concerned judge retires or becomes too impudent. No wonder our judicial system has become the cooperative movement among lawyers and judges to fleece petitioners. 

Why is the CJ crying now? Did he lend a ear when the judges were asked to forego their summer vacations and work? Why are they accepting in the higher judiciary all kinds of petitions instead of restricting themselves only to hear appeals as was intended originally? At the convenience of eminent lawyers why do they give long and frequent adjournments? Why do they take up and waste their time on cases involving VIPs and their progenies and allow cases against them remain undecided for decades? 

Why don't they have a look at the U.S. judiciary, especially higher judiciary. In the USA, matters are decided at State High Courts level and when there are contradictory judgments, one of the Federal Courts hears the appeal. If the matter is really serious enough, only then a further appeal is accepted for hearing in the Supreme Court. Otherwise the Registry does not simply say anything and it is assumed the lower court judgment will hold. The SC decides the dates of hearing and allots time to various counsel and after hearing them, only if it feels that any change is required in the existing law, it announces a judgment. Everything s time bound strictly. If the SC thinks after hearing arguments that no change in law is necessary, just silence, no judgment.  

In India any 'Senior Counsel' can bend the ears of judges at any time and take a stay in favour of their clients and collect retainer for years while the case is pending in SC! Our judiciary should know that if they will not change, our people's government will not remain a mute spectator. If necessary our Government will even amend the Constitution and ensure that the judges perform their duties diligently. No more SC will be asked to rule and it will also rule that fundamental rights are subject to amendments or suspension, as it did a few decades back!