“Recently, I tried to get a dowry harassment complaint registered at a police station in Bengaluru, within the territorial jurisdiction,” says Mudassir Husain, a lawyer with Precinct Legal. What followed is not unheard of in police stations across India – however, the intensity of the situation was worse than usual. “The inspector was reluctant to even read the complaint and directed me to the women's police station. At the women's police station, they refused to take the complaint and asked me to go back to the previous police station. Finally, I had to ask the local MLA to call up the inspector of the police station to accept the complaint,” Mudassir says. “It was a frustrating experience where despite having jurisdiction, police stations refused to consider the complaint,” he adds. Unfortunately, this has become a common experience of people trying to access justice in Bengaluru during the pandemic – especially when it comes to violence against women. On the one hand, police are reluctant to take on cases and file FIRs. On the other hand, access to courts has reduced for people in the city, and so has access to state redressal mechanisms. “People have been waiting years for their court dates, but not everything is available now. While the vegetable shops are open, the courts are closed. Isn’t justice an essential service as well?” asks advocate Manoranjini. ‘Police refuse to take cases’ Mamatha Yajaman, a women’s rights activist says, “Lots of cases (relating to women) have happened during the lockdown. In April there was a big case, where the woman was facing domestic violence in her marital home. But there was no mobility due to the lockdown. She couldn’t go to the police, and when the police were called, they said that there is no vehicle, please come by yourself. This happened during the peak of the lockdown, and there was no way to move around.” Mamatha notes that the problem was mainly seen at the lower rungs of the justice system that interacts with the general public. "The police were not accepting a complaint against an abusive husband. Instead, they were trying to counsel the woman to take the man back when she was not interested and wanted to leave him due to the various atrocities he had committed against her and her family. When we insisted and put pressure on the police, the constable gave a tip to the accused and he absconded. So we face these kinds of problems," she says. “What we have noticed is that IPS officials at the higher levels are usually helpful to the public. But their subordinates are the ones who give a lot of trouble, there needs to be a lot of progress in the system and government,” she says, and that there should be a lot more support from the government on this issue. “The system was just not giving any proper structural support, like a nodal officer, who could oversee cases that were atrocities against women, though this was the need of the hour and many women’s organisations were raising the issue. But they have not set up any system like this. Meanwhile, the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) for the Bengaluru Command Centre Isha Pant said during an online meeting, “We admit that with the lockdown and coronavirus, we have been very busy, as police were involved in managing check posts and making sure people stay at home. The crime cell had been put on the back burner…But I have held a meeting and discussed that we cannot afford to refuse cases, and we have taken steps to take cases.” The Bengaluru Central DCP Chetan Singh Rathore tells TNM that though there were difficulties, the department is trying its best to be accommodating. “Though some police stations had to be closed due to COVID-19, a pandal has been set up outside the police station so that complaints can continue to be taken.” ‘Emergency cases only’ India is known for being a place where ‘the wheels of justice turn slowly’, and the common legal maxim of ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ does not come into the picture, with people going to courts for decades on end while the courts continue to give extension after extension. Courts have closed ever since the lockdown, and the courts are hearing cases on a basis of ‘emergency only,’ there is no saying when the old cases will be heard. “The family courts are not functioning, because they are not ‘urgent’. But this concept is wrong. The court is not taking into consideration the suffering of women in distress,” Mamatha notes. However, even so, there is no legal definition of the term ‘emergency cases’ which has been established, lawyers say. “It all comes down to the discretion of the registrar, to whom we apply to. When it comes to life and death, isn’t it an emergency?” Vasanth Aditya, a lawyer, policy analyst and researcher in Bengaluru asks. Vasanth tells TNM that there should be a better system of access to justice. Vasanth says he has been working on an emergency medical-related case, but it has not been taken up by the courts. “It is a medical negligence case wherein the patient underwent a minor ten-minute surgery, but due to an anesthesian’s error, slipped into coma for months. The hospital has slapped a bill of Rs 29 lakh, when their monthly household income is Rs 10,000. Now, they are asking him to either take the patient out of the ICU or pay the hospital bill. We are not able to get a hearing for the case, which has been going on since February.” Robin Christopher, a criminal lawyer, says that his clients are stuck in jail because of the lack of hearings. “My client has been in jail for eleven years, waiting for the court to deliver justice. Now the case has come to the evidence stage, but it is not being heard due to the various challenges of getting witnesses to come and testify in the courtroom, since the court itself has been closed.” Nature of justice system changed Robin also says that the very nature of access to justice has been changed with only virtual hearings being conducted. “Video conferencing was used only in very extreme cases, for example, when the person was in a different country and could not possibly have made it to the courtroom and give testimony.” However, now that has changed, he says and has caused unique problems in the pursuit of justice. “For example, in a criminal hearing, I can’t sit and discuss the proceedings with the client during the hearing, and I cannot clarify what charges are being heard against him. Since the mic is open to everyone, the client is in the jail, and everyone can hear everyone else,” Robin adds. Robin says even in online hearings, there are gaps where people just don’t know how to use the technology, or there are people who have connectivity issues so they can’t even hear what is being said against them. Vasanth notes that India has always been very poor compared to global rankings, when it comes to delivery of justice because there is no transparency. “We are in the 160th position of transparency of justice. The lockdown has worsened this. People have been waiting for months and years for their cases to come up, and yet there is no system in place for court hearings — we are a technological city and yet a place like Singapore has an automated system for court hearings. In Bengaluru, we have to send an email, and there is no acknowledgement of it. So we have no idea what is happening. It is a gross failure which is systematic,” he concludes.
