lectuer–3 What is Justice?/CPC-1908/English Version

 

BEFORE WE OPEN THE BARE ACT

lectuer–3

What is Justice?

"Justice is not merely about giving a decision; it is about giving the right decision through the right process."

Justice is the ultimate objective of every legal system. Courts are established, laws are enacted, judges are appointed, and judicial institutions are created with one common purpose—to ensure that justice is delivered to every individual in accordance with law. Yet, if an ordinary person is asked, "What is justice?", the most common answer would probably be, "Justice means giving a person what he deserves." Although this answer is not incorrect, it does not fully explain the legal concept of justice.

In law, justice is not merely the final outcome of a dispute. It is equally concerned with the manner in which that outcome is reached. A correct decision arrived at through an unfair process can never inspire public confidence. Therefore, justice is both a result and a process. It is this emphasis on fair procedure that forms the very foundation of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

To appreciate this idea, let us consider a simple illustration.

Suppose two children, Mohan and Sohan, jointly pluck a mango from a tree. Soon a dispute arises, and both claim ownership over the fruit. They approach their mother to resolve the matter. Without asking either child what actually happened, she immediately hands the mango to Mohan.

Can this decision be described as justice?

Most people would answer No.

The problem does not necessarily lie in the decision itself. Mohan may actually have been entitled to the mango. The real defect lies in the procedure. Sohan was never given an opportunity to present his side of the story. A decision that affects the rights of a person should never be taken without first hearing that person.

This simple illustration introduces one of the most fundamental principles of law—the principle of Natural Justice.

One of the best-known rules of Natural Justice is expressed through the Latin maxim:

Audi Alteram Partem

which literally means,

"Hear the other side as well."

This principle requires that no person should be condemned or deprived of his rights without being given a fair opportunity to be heard. As we progress through the study of the CPC, we shall repeatedly encounter procedural provisions that are built upon this very principle.

Consider another illustration.

Suppose a student appears in an annual examination and secures 95 marks. However, due to an error in the result sheet, only 35 marks are recorded. The student approaches the Principal and requests that the answer sheet be re-examined. The Principal refuses even to look at the answer sheet and simply declares that the published result will not be changed.

Would such a decision be fair?

Certainly not.

Even if the Principal honestly believes that the result is correct, refusing to verify the facts before making a decision violates the basic requirement of fairness. Justice requires not only an honest decision-maker but also a fair decision-making process.

This is why the law does not measure justice solely by its final result.

A fair result obtained through an unfair procedure may still undermine public confidence in the legal system. Consequently, courts throughout the common law world have consistently emphasised the following principle:

Justice should not only be done, but should also be seen to be done.

This famous statement conveys a profound idea. Justice must be transparent, impartial, and capable of inspiring confidence in those who seek the protection of the law. It is not enough for a Judge to be fair; the judicial process itself must visibly reflect fairness.

At this stage, an important question naturally arises.

Are law and justice always identical?

Ideally, every legal system seeks to achieve justice. However, justice is not administered according to personal opinions or moral instincts alone. The law prescribes a definite procedure through which justice is to be achieved.

Accordingly, a Civil Court does not merely ask who appears to be right. Before granting any relief, it examines several important questions.

Was the suit instituted in accordance with law?

Has the defendant been given proper notice?

Have both parties been afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing?

Has legally admissible evidence been produced?

Are the findings supported by law?

Only after these procedural safeguards have been satisfied does the Court proceed to determine the rights of the parties.

This is precisely why the Code of Civil Procedure occupies such an important place in the administration of civil justice. It ensures that judicial decisions are based not upon emotion or personal preference but upon fairness, due process, and the rule of law.

Understanding this distinction also helps us appreciate the difference between ordinary thinking and judicial thinking.

An ordinary person confronted with a dispute generally asks,

"Who is right?"

A Judge approaches the matter differently.

The Judge first asks,

• What are the relevant facts?
• What does the applicable law provide?
• Has the prescribed legal procedure been followed?
• What conclusion emerges from the evidence?

Only after answering these questions can a Judge determine which party is legally entitled to relief.

This disciplined method of reasoning is known as Judicial Thinking. It distinguishes judicial decision-making from personal opinion and ensures that every dispute is decided objectively and consistently.

The concept of justice through fair procedure is frequently tested in Judicial Services Examinations.

For example:

Which one of the following is the foundation of Justice?

(a) Speed

(b) Popular Opinion

(c) Fair Procedure

(d) Personal Belief

Correct Answer: (c) Fair Procedure

The central lesson of this chapter is that justice cannot be separated from procedure. A judicial decision is considered truly just only when it is preceded by a fair hearing, supported by reliable evidence, and delivered in accordance with the law. This is the philosophy that underlies the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Code is not merely a technical procedural statute; it is the legal framework that enables Civil Courts to administer justice in a fair, orderly, and transparent manner.

Having understood the meaning of justice, we are now ready to examine another fundamental distinction in law. In the next chapter, we shall explore the difference between Civil Law and Criminal Law, and understand why the Code of Civil Procedure applies exclusively to civil disputes while criminal proceedings are governed by an entirely different procedural framework.