Judicial orders often fail due to enforcement gaps

Source: The post Judicial orders often fail due to enforcement gaps has been created, based on the article “Strengthening enforcement of judicial orders” published in “The Hindu” on 9 April 2025. Judicial orders often fail due to enforcement gaps.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper2-Structure, Organization and Functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary

Context: Judicial directives in India often fail to produce real-world impact due to weak enforcement. A recent example from Jaipur, where the National Green Tribunal’s (NGT) order on limiting air horn usage remains unimplemented, highlights broader systemic challenges in translating court orders into action.

Legal Provisions and Execution Gaps

1. Under Section 38 and Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), courts have the power to execute their own decrees or delegate execution to another court.

2. However, many judicial orders remain unenforced due to questions over decree validity, lack of follow-through, and concerns about judicial misconduct.
3. These gaps reflect a wider issue of weak institutional enforcement capacity.

Enforcement Challenges and Judicial Foresight

1. Despite the NGT’s directive, enforcement agencies like the traffic police, transport department, and pollution control board have failed to act.

2. The NGT also did not assess whether its order was practically enforceable or explore more impactful alternatives, such as a complete air horn ban.
   3. Often, agencies dismiss violations as “minor,” which causes a disconnect between judicial intent and real-world outcomes.
3. This shows the need for judicial foresight in designing rulings that account for on-ground realities and implementation challenges.

Case Studies Highlighting Enforcement Issues

1. In State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Balu (2017), the Supreme Court banned liquor sales within 500 metres of highways to reduce drunk driving.

2. However, poor enforcement followed. Authorities reclassified highways or relocated outlets just beyond the 500-metre mark, effectively bypassing the order.
3. This demonstrates how loopholes and lack of anticipationcan undermine judicial decisions.

Examples of Successful Enforcement

1. Some rulings have succeeded due to clarity, specificity, and oversight. In Common Cause v. Union of India (2018), the legalisation of passive euthanasia was upheld. It was accompanied by detailed guidelines, monitoring mechanisms, and institutional oversight, ensuring effective compliance.

2. Similarly, in the Taj Trapezium Zone case, a green belt was established near the Mathura refinery. This followed the Varadarajan Committee’s recommendations. Air quality monitoring was also mandated, showing that inter-agency collaboration and well-defined mandates lead to successful enforcement.

Strategies for Strengthening Enforcement

1. Each department should appoint a dedicated officer accountable for executing court orders, conducting regular audits, and facing penalties for failure.
2. Technology can help by linking court directives to the relevant agencies, with systems for timely reporting and tracking compliance.
3. Transparency and public awareness further support enforcement. The Kathmandu model, where strict noise regulation was paired with citizen education, shows how public cooperation can drive meaningful change.

Conclusion

Judicial decisions often fail to translate into tangible results due to weak enforcement systems. Strengthening accountability, integrating technology, encouraging public participation, and ensuring inter-agency coordination are crucial. Enforcement should be treated as central to justice, not just an afterthought.

Question for practice:

Examine the key reasons why judicial directives in India often fail to achieve their intended real-world impact, drawing insights from recent enforcement challenges and successful case examples.