India, Aug. 7 -- Last month, two terror cases collapsed in Mumbai courts when the judges found the prosecution could not back their claims with verifiable evidence. Against this backdrop, the Supreme Court's observations, in a Chhattisgarh corruption case, that the criminal justice system is focussed more on the "optics" of arresting and jailing the accused while ignoring much-needed institutional reforms, assumes significance. The legal process is slow and costly, and does not always serve the cause of justice. Jails are overcrowded because of undertrials awaiting closure in their cases for years. Two of the apex court's observations stood out. One, the penchant on the part of law enforcers to establish guilt with confessions rather than follow scientific procedures. This barbaric system is a colonial legacy, as the court pointed out, and of a time when the administration was accountable to the imperial masters and not the citizenry. The relationship between the State and citizens was to have changed after Independence, but policing, despite Prakash Singh (2006), has refused to abandon its colonial legacy, which endows it with absolute power and allows it to ignore the rights given to all citizens, including those accused of crimes. Two, the court's lament on the lack of investment in special prosecution wings, forensic infrastructure, and witness protection programmes. The confessions culture is an outcome of ignoring forensics and other scientific methods in probes. Lower constabulary that does the preliminary investigation, is rarely trained in forensics or the use of technology, which influences it to lean on extra-judicial methods to solve crimes. This is as much the case with investigators and courts that deal with white collar crimes such as corruption, where notional losses end up as sensational claims and, in some cases, public indictment of the decision makers, until the judiciary intervenes. Hopefully, the court will follow up on its observations and get the government to act on these concerns....