爱上海,上海419论坛,上海龙凤419 - Powered by Impart Gender Sensitization Training To Judges; Include Such Courses In LLB & AIBE Syllabus: Supreme Court

Impart Gender Sensitization Training To Judges; Include Such Courses In LLB & AIBE Syllabus: Supreme Court

first_imgTop StoriesImpart Gender Sensitization Training To Judges; Include Such Courses In LLB & AIBE Syllabus: Supreme Court LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK18 March 2021 8:30 PMShare This – xThe Supreme Court suggested that gender sensitization training should be imparted to Judges and public prosecutors.The bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and S. Ravindra Bhat also observed that each High Court should formulate a module on judicial sensitivity to sexual offences, to be tested in the Judicial Services Examination. It also directed the Bar Council of India to take steps…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court suggested that gender sensitization training should be imparted to Judges and public prosecutors.The bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and S. Ravindra Bhat also observed that each High Court should formulate a module on judicial sensitivity to sexual offences, to be tested in the Judicial Services Examination. It also directed the Bar Council of India to take steps to include such courses as part of LLB and AIBE syllabus.These directions were issued in the judgment setting aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court Judgment that had imposed a bail condition upon the person (accused of outraging the modesty of his neighbour) to request the victim to tie the rakhi around his wrist.The National Judicial Academy is hereby requested to devise, speedily, the necessary inputs which have to be made part of the training of young judges, as well as form part of judges’ continuing education with respect to gender sensitization, with adequate awareness programs regarding stereotyping and unconscious biases that can creep into judicial reasoning. The syllabi and content of such courses shall be framed after necessary consultation with sociologists and teachers in psychology, gender studies or other relevant fields, preferably within three months. The course should emphasize upon the relevant factors to be considered, and importantly, what should be avoided during court hearings and never enter judicial reasoning. Public Prosecutors and Standing Counsel too should undergo mandatory training in this regard. The training program, its content and duration shall be developed by the National Judicial Academy, in consultation with State academies. The course should contain topics such as appropriate court-examination and conduct and what is to be avoided.The Bar Council of India (BCI) should also consult subject experts and circulate a paper for discussion with law faculties and colleges/universities in regard to courses that should be taught at the undergraduate level, in the LL.B program. The BCI shall also require topics on sexual offences and gender sensitization to be mandatorily included in the syllabus for the All India Bar Examination.  Each High Court should, with the help of relevant experts, formulate a module on judicial sensitivity to sexual offences, to be tested in the Judicial Services Examination.Justice Ravindra Bhat, who authored the judgment, began with the following quote of Henrik Ibsen (Norwegian playwright): A woman cannot be herself in the society of the present day, which is an exclusively masculine society, with laws framed by men and with a judicial system that judges feminine conduct from a masculine point of view.” “Ibsen, the prescient nineteenth century author, made a powerful statement (quoted as the epigram at the beginning of this judgment); sadly, even today, in the twenty first century, after 70 years as a republic with the goal of equality for all, many courts seem to be oblivious of the problem.”. The court said.The court observed that stereotyping might compromise the impartiality of a judge’s decision and affect his or her views about witness credibility or the culpability of the accused person. “Judges can play a significant role in ridding the justice system of harmful stereotypes. They have an important responsibility to base their decisions on law and facts in evidence, and not engage in gender stereotyping. This requires judges to identify gender stereotyping, and identify how the application, enforcement or perpetuation of these stereotypes discriminates against women or denies them equal access to justice.”, the bench added.The Court also issued a set of guidelines to be followed by Courts while dealing with sexual crimes.Title : Aparna Bhat vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [CrA 329 OF 2021]Coram : Justices AM Khanwilkar and S Ravindra Bhat Citation : LL 2021 SC 168Click here to read/download the judgmentNext Storylast_img

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *