Brief Resume of Legal
Services Authorities Act,1987 (Act No. 39 of 1987 as amended vide
Act No. 37 of 2002)
By the constitutional 42nd Amendment Act of 76, a new provision was
incorporated in the Constitution under Article 39A, for providing
free Legal Aid and concept of equal justice found a place in our
constitution Article 39A which was incorporated under part
IV-Directive Principles of State Policy reads as under:-
“Equal justice and free legal aid-The State shall secure that the
operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal
opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by
suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that
opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by
reason of economic or other disabilities”.
2. With the object of providing free legal aid, the Government of
India had, by a resolution dated 26th September, 1980 appointed a
Committee known as “Committee for Implementing Legal Aid Schemes” (CILAS)
under the chairmanship of Mr. Justice P.N. Bhagwati (as he then was)
to monitor and implement legal aid programmes on an uniform basis in
all the States and Union Territories. CILAS evolved a model scheme
for legal aid programmes applicable throughout the country by which
several legal aid and advice Boards were set up in the States and
Union Territories.
3. In the case of Hossainara Khatun Vs. State of Bihar in AIR 1979
S.C. page 1371, the Supreme Court held that the right to free legal
services is an essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just
procedure for a person accused of an offence and it must be held to
be implicit in the guarantee of Article 21. This was a case where it
was found by Mr. Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Justice D.A. Desai that
many under-trail prisoners in different jails in the State of Bihar
had been in jail for period longer than the maximum terms for which
they would have been sentenced, if convicted, and that their
retention in jails was totally unjustified and in violation of the
fundamental rights to personal liberty under Article 21 of the
Constitution. While disclosing shocking state of affairs and
callousness of our legal and judicial system causing enormous misery
and sufferings to the poor and illiterate citizens resulting into
totally unjustified deprivation of personal liberty, Justice P.N.
Bhagwati (as he then was), made following observations in para 6 of
the judgment, which are thought provoking:-
“This unfortunate situation cries aloud for introduction of an
adequate and comprehensive legal service programmes, but so far,
these cries do not seem to have evoked any response. We do not think
it is possible to reach the benefits of the legal process to the
poor to protect them against injustice and to secure to them their
constitutional and statutory rights unless there is a nation-wide
legal service programme to provide free legal services to them.”
4. It is also worth while to quote the following observations of
Justice P.N. Bhagwati in para 9 of the said judgment:-
“We would strongly recommend to the Government of India and the
State Government that it is high time that a comprehensive legal
service programme is introduced in the country. That is not only a
mandate of equal justice implicit in Article 14 and to right to life
and liberty conferred by Article 21, but also the compulsion of the
constitutional directive embodied in Article 39A.”
5. Two years thereafter, in the case of Khatri Vs. State of Bhiar
reported in AIR 1981 S.C. at page 926 (Bhagalpur Blinded Prisoners’
case) Justice P.N. Bhagwati while referring to the Supreme Court’s
mandate in the aforesaid Hossainara Khatun’s case, made the
following comments, in para 4 of the said judgment
“It is unfortunate that though this Court declared the right to
legal aid as a fundamental right of an accused person by a process
of judicial construction of Article 21, most of the States in the
country have not taken note of this decision and provided free legal
services to a person accused of an offence…………..The State is under a
constitutional mandate to provide free legal aid to an accused
person who is unable to secure legal services on account of
indigence, and whatever is necessary for this purpose has to be done
by the State. The State may have its financial constraints and its
priorities in expenditure but the law does not permit any Government
to deprive its priorities in expenditure but the law does not permit
any Government to deprive its citizens of constitutional rights on
the plea of poverty.”
6. In 1986, in another case of Sukhdas V. Union Territory of
Arunachal Pradesh, reported in AIR 1986 S.C. at page 991, Justice
P.N. Bhagwati, once again, while referring to the earlier decision
of Hossainara Khatun’s case and some other cases had made the
following observations in para 6 of the said judgment:-
“Now it is common knowledge that about 70% of the people living in
rural areas are illiterate and even more than that percentage of the
people are not aware of the rights conferred upon them by law. Even
literate people do not know what are their rights and entitlements
under the law. It is this absence of legal awareness which is
responsible for the deception, exploitation and deprivation of
rights and benefits from which the poor suffer in this land. Their
legal needs always stand to become crisis oriented because their
ignorance prevents them from anticipating legal troubles and
approaching a lawyer for consultation and advise in time and their
poverty magnifies the impact of the legal troubles and difficulties
when they come. Moreover, because of their ignorance and illiteracy,
they cannot become self-reliant; they cannot even help themselves.
The Law ceases to be their protector because they do not know that
they are entitled to the protection of the law and they can avail of
the legal service programmes for putting an end to their
exploitation and winning their rights. The result is that poverty
becomes with them a condition of total helplessness. This miserable
condition in which the poor find themselves can be alleviated to
some extent by creating legal awareness amongst the poor. That is
why it has always been recognized as one of the principal items of
the programme of the legal aid movement in the country to promote
legal literacy. It would be in these circumstances made a mockery of
legal aid if it were to be left to a poor, ignorant and illiterate
accused to ask for free legal service, legal aid would become merely
a paper promise and it would fail of its purpose.”
7. It was in the above backdrop that he Parliament passed the Legal
Services Authorities Act, 1987, which was published in the Gazette
of India Extraordinary Part II, Section I No. 55 dated 12th October,
1987. Although the Act was passed in 1987, the provisions of the
Act, except Chapter III, were enforced with effect from 9.11.1995 by
the Central Government Notification S.O.893(E) dated 9.11.1995.
Chapter III, under the heading “State Legal Services Authorities”
was enforced in different States under different Notifications in
the years 1995-98. In Haryana, it was implemented with effect from
3.4.1996.
8. This Act, as amended with effect from 12.6.2002, now provides for
decision even on merits, by the Presiding Officers of the Permanent
Lok Adalats constituted by the State Legal Services Authority, of
those matters which relate to “public utility services” which have
been duly defined in the Act.
