‘A Failure of the Constitution’: Justice Nath Decries Ineffective Legal Aid for India’s Undertrials

NEW DELHI – In a powerful critique of India's criminal justice system, Supreme Court Justice Vikram Nath declared that legal aid rendered merely "in form but not in spirit" is a failure of the Constitution itself. Speaking at the release of a comprehensive report on undertrial prisoners, he highlighted a deep-seated crisis where over 70% of the nation's prison population has not been convicted of any crime, languishing in jails due to a legal aid system plagued by ineffectiveness and profound distrust.

“Free legal aid cannot be poor legal aid,” Justice Nath asserted, emphasizing that providing counsel is not an act of charity but a fundamental constitutional duty. “When legal aid is rendered in form but not in spirit, it may still comply with procedure, but it fails the Constitution. It fails the idea of justice itself.”

His remarks were delivered at an event for the report, ‘Between Custody and Constitution: Field Lessons in Delivering Fair Trial Rights-Legal Aid for Undertrial Prisoners,’ by the Square Circle Clinic, NALSAR. The report, a culmination of a five-year Fair Trial Programme in Pune and Nagpur, paints a grim picture of the gap between constitutional promises and the lived reality of hundreds of thousands of undertrials.

---

A System Betraying Constitutional Promises

At the heart of Justice Nath's address was the erosion of rights guaranteed under Articles 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and 39A (Equal Justice and Free Legal Aid). He described these as "twin pillars" meant to ensure that poverty or ignorance do not become barriers to justice. However, the current state of legal aid reduces this constitutional mandate to a procedural formality, leaving the most vulnerable at the mercy of a broken system.

The judge pointed to a devastating statistic from the report: despite their overwhelming numbers, only 7.91% of undertrials have utilized the free legal aid available to them. This is not merely due to a lack of awareness. A significant number of prisoners, he explained, actively avoid the system due to a "distrust stemming from past experiences."

“They rather go ahead with engaging some private advocate believing that if they pay someone, he’ll do better than the person who is getting nothing out of it,” Justice Nath remarked. This deep-rooted skepticism transforms the right to legal aid into an empty promise, forcing the indigent to choose between inadequate state-sponsored help and ruinous private legal fees.

This systemic failure has tangible, devastating consequences. Justice Nath described his daily encounters with cases where individuals accused of minor offenses remain in custody for prolonged periods, often without a chargesheet even being filed. Bail applications, he noted, are often "filed mechanically, without supporting documents, without sureties that the accused can actually produce." As a result, undertrials remain incarcerated not because the law demands it, "but because the system has failed him."

The tragic irony is that many end up serving more time in pre-trial detention than the maximum possible sentence for the crime they are accused of. This reality starkly contradicts the foundational legal principle of being innocent until proven guilty.

The Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Communities

The report and Justice Nath’s commentary shed light on the compounded injustices faced by already marginalized groups within the prison system. “While the situation is difficult for all undertrials, it is far worse for women, for individuals with mental health concerns, and those from marginalised communities,” he stated.

The data from the Fair Trial Programme, which handled 5,783 cases, is revealing: - 67.6% belonged to disadvantaged caste groups. - 78.1% earned less than ₹10,000 per month. - 79.8% worked in the unorganised sector. - 79.2% had no family contact, isolating them further from any potential support network.

For women, Justice Nath observed, prison becomes an extension of the "social control, moral scrutiny, and gender policing" they face outside. He lamented that official data, including the Prison Statistics of India report, often invisibilises the unique experiences of women and transgender persons, rendering their struggles undocumented and their voices unheard.

He stressed that a one-size-fits-all approach to legal aid is insufficient. Instead, he called for the adoption of "the lens of substantive equality," which requires laws, policies, and institutions to account for the distinct burdens carried by vulnerable groups. True equality, he argued, can only be achieved through tailored support, including effective legal aid, access to healthcare, and institutional sensitivity.

A Call for Data-Driven, Coordinated Reform

Justice Nath argued that meaningful reform is impossible without robust, empirical data. He criticized the current data collection methods as "insufficient in both scope and quality," noting that crucial information, such as the health status of prisoners, is often overlooked. The continued neglect of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, further exacerbates the crisis for inmates with mental health conditions.

The proposed solution is a move towards creating comprehensive national and state-level databases that track undertrial prisoners longitudinally—from arrest through release or conviction. Critically, this data must be disaggregated.

“This data must be disaggregated by caste, religion, economic status, gender, and geography, so that we can clearly see where and how the system fails particular communities,” Justice Nath urged. “For when we cannot measure a problem with accuracy, we cannot hope to design solutions with integrity.”

Beyond data, he called for systemic integration and accountability. The various components of the legal aid system—courts, prisons, Legal Services Authorities, and defense counsel—cannot work in "separate boxes." He envisioned a connected system where there is a clear line of responsibility from an accused person's first appearance before a magistrate to their final representation.

“It is not enough to just provide a lawyer; we must ensure that the representation is effective,” he reiterated, calling for regular performance checks, skill-building, and mentorship within the Legal Services Authorities to elevate the quality of aid provided.

Ultimately, Justice Nath concluded that restoring faith in the justice system will not be achieved through "monumental judgments alone," referencing landmark cases like Hussainara Khatoon . Instead, it will be restored "by the everyday decency of those who serve within it." For India’s democracy to breathe easier, he argued, legal aid must become meaningful, and in turn, justice must become visible.