Only one-third of economic offences end in convictions
More people on trial for economic offences are acquitted than are convicted.
Only around 33.6 per cent of such cases ended in convictions, showed the data from the National Crime Records Bureau. A total of 56.5 per cent of completed trials ended in acquittals, showed a Business Standard analysis of the pandemic year data. The remaining 9.9 per cent of the trials ended with a discharge. This is a remedy for people who have been falsely accused, and for whom there isn’t sufficient evidence of the crime before the court.
There were 1,757 such instances in 2020. The number of convictions was 5,938. The acquittals numbered 9,995. This is based on the number of trials completed. The total number of offences registered during the year was 145,754. This is 12 per cent lower than the previous year. But pendency has been rising.
Pendency is defined as the cases pending trial out of the ones which are supposed to go to trial. This has risen to 96.8 per cent in 2020. This is the highest since at least the previous five years. The pandemic affected court functioning. But pendency has been steadily rising higher even before Covid-19. Each year since 2017 has had a higher pendency rate than the previous one.
Even the bright spots among the major states and Union Territories are ones where around half of the cases end in acquittals. This includes Uttar Pradesh with a reported conviction rate of 55.6 per cent, Delhi (with a conviction rate of 53.9 per cent), and Rajasthan (46.4 per cent). The conviction rate for Maharashtra is 13.4 per cent, 12.6 per cent for Tamil Nadu, 12 per cent for Bihar, and 2.5 per cent for Gujarat.
Studies have shown that delays and inefficiencies have multiple causes.
“A large factor could merely be the lack of judges against the sanctioned strength of the high court in question. At present, nearly 40 per cent of seats in the high courts are vacant and vacancy has never been below 20 per cent in the last decade,” said a 2016 study entitled ‘State of the Indian Judiciary: A Report’ from civil society organisation Daksh, in a section authored by lawyer Alok Prasanna Kumar.
The conviction rate for economic offences is still better than some other crimes. Crimes against women have a conviction rate of 29.8 per cent. The conviction rate for atrocities against scheduled tribes is 28.5 per cent.
Less effective courts have definite economic effects, noted a 2004 paper entitled ‘Does the Quality of the Judiciary Shape Economic Activity? Evidence from India.’
“…a slow judiciary implies more breaches of contract, discourages firms from undertaking relationship-specific investments, impedes the access of firms to formal financial institutions, and favours inefficient dynasties,” said author Matthieu Chemin of the London School of Economics.
The same firm would perform differently if it was located in a state with low pendency, according to the paper.
“The negative implications of having an inefficient judiciary are large - moving a firm from the highest to the lowest pendency state would result in a 10 per cent improvement in firm performance,” it said.
Criminal breach of trust had a national conviction rate of 40.8 per cent among the economic offences. It was 32.5 per cent for counterfeiting. Forgery, cheating, and fraud had a conviction rate of 32.3 per cent.