India to attain intellectual capability of Judiciary Engineering

Objections demanded from Hon’ble President, Supreme Court of India, PMO, Bar Council of India and Ministry of Law and Justice against to introduce upcoming world’s 5th school of jurisprudence called as school of contemporary jurisprudence in Indian public domain. After the introduction of Contemporary School of Jurisprudence before World platform, India shall be became 4th nation which has been attained intellectual capability of Judiciary Engineering, thereafter British Judiciary Operator tag shall be removed itself. Contemporary Jurisprudence, claiming for, Indian Judicial system shall be 25 times faster and 20 times more transparent.

Jurisprudence is supreme in the area of justice

As per universal truth, jurisprudence is supreme in the area of justice, meanwhile all constitutions worldwide are just a product and all judicial systems are by product of jurisprudence. Worldwide every constitution, act, rule has been developed from root of jurisprudence. In the history of mankind the most of four school of jurisprudence are recognised since after natural jurisprudence such as

United Kingdom launched analytical/Imperative school of jurisprudence (1800 to 1850) which was propounded by Bentham and Austin.

Germany launched historical school of jurisprudence and sociology school of jurisprudence (1750 to 1890), likewise Friedrich Savigny and Ihering called as father of historical jurisprudence and father of sociology jurisprudence respectively.

USA launch realist school of jurisprudence, which was prepounded by Oliver Wendell Holmes during (1950-1920), likewise called as father of realist jurisprudence.

Therefore UK, Germany and USA are only recognisable states, which having judicial engineering capability. Meanwhile recently Mr. Deepak Sharma (Indian Jurist) requested for objections (if any) before Indian constitutional body, against to introduce new jurisprudence, named by school of contemporary jurisprudence. Key concept of Contemporary Jurisprudence.

 This School of contemporary jurisprudence propounded by Mr. Deepak Sharma (Indian Jurist) likewise called as father of contemporary jurisprudence.

Key concept of Contemporary Jurisprudence 

Unlike previous school of jurisprudence, contemporary jurisprudence don't show any philosophy, emphasis on conceptual bias, against any philosophy.

Contemporary jurisprudence has been developed to found answer the basic question of jurisprudence, which are not covered by previous school of jurisprudence.

Contemporary jurisprudence more emphasize upon the efficiency and effectiveness of judicial system.

Contemporary jurisprudence more emphasis / target's to solve all judicial requirement for mankind.

Which type of benefit to be get mankind from contemporary jurisprudence?

Mr. Deepak Sharma said, that contemporary jurisprudence shall be capable to fulfil all judicial requirements of mankind.

According to Mr. Deepak Sharma (father of Contemporary Jurisprudence), that mankind is suffering from –

How effective and efficient judicial system to be invented has been resolved.

Requirement of centralised judicial trial process, (since after Jury and Bar - Bench) trial has been invented.

Issued upon type of laws and law making process has been clarified.

Relationship of democracy with judicial through the theory of developing stage of judiciary stages, degree of democracy, types of law, parliament public society relationship structure, centralised trial process are new concept hereby going to introduce for Mankind in contemporary Jurisprudence.

Why India needs contemporary jurisprudence?

Mr. Sharma said that India is using British judicial system which is based on Bar- Bench trial proceeding, whenever Bar-Bench is decentralized judicial proceed system, which is suitable for only states, which have population under 4-5 crore, while India as state caring population more than 130 crores. Therefore current British judiciary system is not suitable for India, hence we are going to introduce world’s first centralised judicial trial preceding system named by Just-in-trial (J.I.T) against previous Jury and Bar-Bench trial system, which shall be 25 times faster and 20 time more transparent against Bar-Bench judicial trial system, J.I.T shall be sufficient weapon for fulfil Indian judicial requirement.

On the question, on which ground objection demanded from Indian constitutional body. Mr. Sharma replied that development is basic requirement for every state worldwide. While development depend on three basic intellectual capability, such as Economic intellectual capability, judicial intellectual capability and technical know how, while India is still depend on western economic concept and British juridical system since after 70+ years of independence, while both of concept are incompetent against Indian Economical and Judicial requirement. Mr. Sharma further claim's that as per wide provision of Article 19 and 51a of Constitution of India, his aforesaid move is according and having fully constitutional validity, Mr. Sharma confirm that certain objection demanded from Hon'ble President, P.M.O, Supreme Court of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and Bar Council of India, only for purpose to compare the current Indian judiciary system with upcoming judiciary system, in Indian public domain.

Against aforesaid surprise claim of contemporary jurisprudence, all jurists worldwide waiting for detailing of contemporary jurisprudence. If contemporary jurisprudence prove itself against cardinal principle of jurisprudence, it shall be great opportunity for mankind as well as India, and it shall be enormous mile stone in the history of Jurisprudence and entire history of mankind.