Every sovereign state is duty-bound to protect its external borders and maintain internal peace, therefore the two main functions of the state are war and justice. i.e., to wage a war against any country that threatens peace and provide justice to every person whose rights are violated and maintain internal peace in the state.

Administration of justice simply means 'By Law'. It is a process by which a government is executed by a legal system. In our country, the whole procedure of administration of criminal justice is divided into three sets, mainly being, 'investigation, inquiry and trial'. For every offense under Indian Penal Code, the process of investigation, inquiry, and trial is followed by The Criminal Procedural Code, 1973.

Chapter XXVI of the Criminal Procedural Code lays down the provisions affecting the administration of justice under Sections 340 to 352. The main purpose behind the Criminal Procedure Code is to maintain effective administration that is adopted by both executive and judiciary in order to dispose of criminal cases. Offenses against the administration of justice are specific types of violations of the law. Sections 340 to 352the of the Criminal Procedural Code specifically deal with offenses against the administration of justice[1].

Background
There are various theories as to why be there a need for the rise of the administration of justice. But a good explanation would be to maintain rights within a political community by a state using physical force. The three simple key statements to define the administration of justice would be; maintenance of rights, politically organized society, and physical force of state backed up by sanctions.

In earlier times when people faced any kind of issues in the justice system, they called their elders to solve their problems. The elders were well respected and highly looked upon. In the same way, today when people face issues and cannot do justice by themselves, they turn to the state who has established the justice system, and as stated, in order to maintain rights, there came a rise in the administration of justice.

Nature
Administration of justice provides certainty to people that make sure that people know that their rights are safe and when violated, they can turn to the state for justice. For example, when a murder is committed, people are certain that there is a system that will punish the offender under the law, defined under Indian Penal Code.

Secondly, it brings predictability. When a crime is committed people already know that they have a system backing their rights, but they will also be able to predict what punishment will be provided to the culprit for his specific crime. The administration of justice also provides a guarantee of rights and wisdom to provide justice to the people.

But the drawback of the administration of justice is that it is very rigid in nature. Laws are made in a certain way and changing them takes a session itself. When it comes to the procedural part of the administration of justice, it is a quite lengthy process and too formalistic. The formalities hold too much importance and sometimes consume a whole lot of time. It is quite technical, one must abide by all the procedures in order to file a complaint or attain justice. It is said that 'sometimes it becomes a dream to attain justice' so one can imagine the amount of time and strength it takes to go through each a very step to gain justice.[2]

Types:
There are two types of justice, Civil and Criminal. This means there are two types of wrongs, civil wrongs, and criminal wrongs. Criminal wrongs are Public wrongs while civil wrongs are private wrongs.

• Civil justice:
  civil laws refer to laws relating to disputes between individuals, organizations, or both. The main object of the administration of civil justice is to give relief by way of compensation or other relief to the injured party. The rights executed by civil proceedings are of two kinds-Primary rights and Sanctioning rights. In civil cases plaintiff files a suit in front of relevant courts.
   
• Criminal Justice:
  criminal laws are a set of rules and regulations that provides conduct of human in society and also defines punishments. The administration of criminal justice is to discipline the lawbreaker. discipline may be described as the infliction by State Authority, of a consequence typically regarded as a wrong (imprisonment or death) on an individual set up to be fairly shamefaced of a crime. In such cases, the suit is instated by the government[3].

Theories Of Punishments

1. Preventive theory:
   this theory states that by punishing a wrongdoer under the law, the state is preventing a person from repeating an offense, preventive punishments can be given in a number of ways. For example, by detention or by long-term imprisonment.
   
   Kant has criticized this theory by saying that this theory treats the wrongdoer as an object (by giving them long-term imprisonment), which will lead the person's state of mind to become more aggressive or criminal and there is a possibility that the person might learn to behave more aggressively by being in contact with other offenders in the prison.
    
2. Deterrent theory:
   this theory says that the punishment should be given in a such manner that it creates terror in the minds of not just the offender but the people themselves so that the offender does not repeat the offense again and the people will not think of doing such thing either. For example, in some countries, the punishment for committing rape is the execution of the offender by public stoning.
   
   But this theory is strongly criticized by Kenny by saying that the theory will only be successful when the offender realizes that he has done an offense. Also by Holmes, this theory is immoral, as it gives o measure to the punishments.
    
3. Retributive theory:
   this theory basically speaks about taking revenge. According to this theory, when punishment is given to the wrongdoer, it should be in such a way that it satisfies the victim party, in a way that they say 'an eye for an eye, or an answer to a brick thrown is by throwing back a stone'.
   
   This theory is criticized by stating that the theory is based on taking revenge and thus is morally and ethically wrong. 'Tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye' cannot be used in today's world, it is practically impossible.
    
4. Reformative theory:
   this theory states that killing cannot be a cure. An offense is committed under the influence of motive on the character of the accused. Therefore, a person's motive can be changed and the crime can be prevented, by finding and eliminating the weakness of the accused. This theory is applied liberally in India in the form of the release of first-time offenders on probation for good conduct. But this theory fails in cases where certain offenders are not curable.
    
5. Expiatory theory:
   According to this theory, when an offender is convicted by law and has served his imprisonment, his offense is expiatory and he becomes pure and goes to heaven as other people go. But this theory is criticized by stating that is outdated and does not fall under the domain of law.[4]

Sections Dealing With Offences Against The Administration Of Justice Under The Code Of Criminal Procedure

Section 340: Procedure in cases mentioned under section 195

1. When an application is filed before a court by a public servant or affected, a preliminary inquiry must be made before appearing inside the court, if the court is of the opinion that it's miles expedient in nature for the management of justice. Offenses are prescribed under section 195(1) (b) If the court feels that an incorrect or fabricated record has been produced, public order is harmed or the complaints had been hampered with the aid of producing fake evidence.
   
   The court, after sporting out the initial inquiry, can document a locating on that factor; could make a complaint thereof if the court is of the opinion that the offense has been devoted for which the utility is filed; deliver the case to the Justice of the Peace having first elegance jurisdiction, everywhere the jurisdiction of the offense lies (the place wherein the offense became dedicated); can take enough protection from the accused for the reason of the appearance of the accused and might ship the accused below the custody of the concerned magistrate; any person may be positive to seem in court docket and supply pieces of evidence.
    
2. All of the powers as given in sub-clause 1 of section 340 of the Code with recognition to offense, wherein the court docket has neither made a grievance below Section 34(1) nor rejected the utility for making this sort of grievance, might be exercised by means of the court docket to which the preceding court is subordinate as constant with that means of Section 195(4) of the CrPC.
    
3. And (4) the criticism made underneath Section 340(1) of CrPC is to be signed through the officer appointed by the immoderate court wherein the case seems. In exceptional instances, the presiding officer of the court or any officer legal in the manner of the court can signal criticism. The court can be any court, civil, or tribunal, in keeping with Section 195 of the CrPC.

Section 341: Appeal:

1. Any person on whose operation any Court other than a High Court has refused to make a complaint under sub-section 1) or sub-section (2) of section 340, or against whom such a complaint has been made by a similar Court, may appeal to the Court to which similar former Court is inferior within the meaning of sub-section (4) of section 195, and the Superior Court may therefore, after notice to the parties concerned, direct the pullout of the complaint, or, as the case may be, making of the complaint which similar former Court might have made under section 340, and if it makes a similar complaint, the vittles of that section shall apply consequently.
    
2. An order under this section, and subject to any similar order, an order under section 340, shall be final, and shall not be subject to modification.[5]

Section 342: Power to order costs.

Any Court dealing with an application made to it for filing a complaint under section 340 or an appeal under section 341, shall have the power to make such order as to costs as may be just.

Section 343: The procedure of Magistrate taking cognizance.

1. A Magistrate to whom a complaint is made under section 340 or section 341 shall, notwithstanding anything contained in Chapter XV, do, as far as may be, to deal with the case as if it were introduced on a police report.
    
2. Where it's brought to the notice of a similar Magistrate, or of any other Magistrate to whom the case may have been transferred, that an appeal is pending against the decision arrived at in the judicial proceeding out of which the matter has arisen, he may, if he thinks fit, at any stage, recess the hail of the case until a similar appeal is decided.[6]

Section 344: Summary procedure for trial for giving false substantiation.

• If at the time of delivery of any judgment or final order disposing of any judicial proceeding, a Court of Session or Magistrate of the first class expresses an opinion to the effect that any substantiation appearing in a similar proceeding had deliberately or willfully given false substantiation or had fabricated false substantiation with the intention that similar substantiation should be used in the similar proceeding, it or he may, if satisfied that it's necessary and advisable in the interest of justice that the substantiation should be tried pithily for giving or fabricating, as the case may be, false substantiation, take cognizance of the offense and may, after giving the lawbreaker a reasonable occasion of showing cause why he shouldn't be penalized for a similar offense, try similar lawbreaker pithily and doom him to imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or to fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
   
• In every similar case the Court shall follow, as nearly as may be practicable, the procedure specified for summary trials.
   
• Nothing in this section shall affect the power of the Court to make a complaint under section 340 for the offense, which it doesn't choose to do under this section.
   
• Where, after any action is initiated under sub-section (1), it's made to appear to the Court of Session or Magistrate of the first class that an appeal or an operation for modification has been preferred or filed against the judgment or order in which the opinion appertained to in that sub-section has been expressed, it or he shall stay farther proceedings of the trial until the disposal of the appeal or the operation for modification, as the case may be, and therefore the farther proceedings of the trial shall abide by the results of the appeal or operation for modification.[7]

Section 345: Procedure in certain cases of disdain.

1. When any similar offenses are described in Section 175, section 178, section 179, section 180, or Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code( 45 of 1860), is committed in the view or presence of any Civil, Felonious, or Revenue Court, the Court may beget the lawbreaker to be detained in guardianship and may, at any time before the rising of the Court on the same day, take cognizance of the offense and, after giving the lawbreaker a reasonable occasion of showing cause why he shouldn't be penalized under this section, judgment the lawbreaker to fine not exceeding two hundred rupees, and, in dereliction of payment of fine, to simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, unless similar fine be sooner paid.
    
2. In every similar case the Court shall record the data constituting the offense, with the statement (if any) made by the lawbreaker, as well as the finding and judgment.
    
3. If the offense is under section 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), the record shall show the nature and stage of the judicial proceeding in which the Court intruded or disrespected was sitting, and the nature of the interruption or personality.

346. Procedure where Court considers, that case shouldn't be dealt with under section 345

1. If the Court, in any case, considers that a person indicted of any of the offenses appertained to in section 345 and committed in its view or presence should be locked else than in dereliction of payment of fine, or that a fine exceeding two hundred rupees should be assessed upon him, or similar Court is for any other reason of opinion that the case shouldn't be disposed of under section 345, similar Court, after recording the data constituting the offense and the statement of the indicted as hereinbefore handed, may further the case to a Magistrate having governance to try the same and may bear security to be given for the appearance of the similar person before similar Magistrate, or if sufficient security isn't given shall further similar person in guardianship to similar Magistrate.
    
2. The Magistrate to whom any case is encouraged under this section shall do to deal with, as far as may be, as if it were introduced on a police report.

Section 347: When Registrar or Sub-Registrar to be deemed a Civil Court.
When the State Government so directs, any Registrar or any Sub-Registrar appointed under the Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), shall be deemed to be a Civil Court within the meaning of sections 345 and 346.[8]

Section 348: Discharge of lawbreaker on submission of reason.
When any Court has under section 345 arbitrated a lawbreaker to discipline or has under section 346 encouraged him to a Magistrate for trial, for refusing or forgetting to do anything which he was lawfully needed to do or for any purposeful personality or interruption, the Court may, in its discretion, discharge the lawbreaker or remit the discipline on his submission to the order or importunity of similar Court, or on reason being made to its satisfaction.

Section 349: Imprisonment or commitment of a person refusing to answer or produce a document.
If any witness or person called to produce a document or thing before a Criminal Court refuses to answer such questions as are put to him or to produce any document or thing in his possession or power which the Court requires him to produce, and does not, after a reasonable opportunity has been, given, to him so to do, offer any reasonable excuse for such refusal, such Court may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, sentence him to simple imprisonment, or by warrant under the hand of the Presiding Magistrate or Judge commit him to the custody of an officer of the Court for any term not exceeding seven days, unless, in the meantime, such person consents to be examined and to answer, or to produce the document or thing and in the event of his persisting in his refusal, he may be dealt with according to the provisions of section 345 or section 346.[9]

350: Summary procedure for punishment for non-attendance by a witness in obedience to the summons.

1. If any witness being summoned to appear before a Criminal Court is legally bound to appear at a certain place and time in obedience to the summons and without just excuse neglects or refuses to attend at that place or time or departs from the place where he has to attend before the time at which it is lawful for him to depart, and the Court before which the witness is to appear is satisfied that it is expedient in the interests of justice that such a witness should be tried summarily, the Court may take cognizance of the offense and after giving the offender an opportunity of showing cause why he should not be punished under this section, sentence him to fine not exceeding one hundred rupees.
    
2. In every such case the Court shall follow, as nearly as may be practicable, the procedure prescribed for summary trials.[10]

Section 351: Appeals from convictions under sections 344, 345, 349, and 350.

1. Any person sentenced by any Court other than a High Court under section 344, section 345, section 349, or section 350 may, notwithstanding anything contained in this Code appeal to the Court to which decrees or orders made in such Court are ordinarily appealable.
    
2. The provisions of Chapter XXIX shall, so far as they are applicable, apply to appeals under this section, and the Appellate Court may alter or reverse the finding, or reduce or reverse the sentence appealed against.
    
3. An appeal from such conviction by a Court of Small Causes shall lie to the Court of Session for the session's division within which such Court is situated.
    
4. An appeal from such conviction by any Registrar or Sub-Registrar deemed to be a Civil Court by virtue of a direction issued under section 347 shall lie to the Court of Session for the session's division within which the office of such Registrar or Sub-Registrar is situated.[11]

Section 352: Certain Judges and Magistrates are not to try certain offenses when committed before themselves.
Except as provided in sections 344, 345, 349, and 350, no Judge of a Criminal Court (other than a Judge of a High Court) or Magistrate shall try any person for any offense referred to in section 195, when such an offense is committed before himself or in contempt of his authority or is brought under his notice as such Judge or Magistrate in the course of a judicial proceeding.

Landmark Cases:

• Pritish v. State of Maharashtra (2001)
  A bench of Justices K.T. Thomas, S.N. Phukan, and Y.K. Sabharwal of the Supreme Court of India upheld that the scheme of Sections 340 to 344 of the Code comprises an in-built safety for the individuals sought to be proceeded against, by obliging the court to afford an opportunity of being heard to them, in the case of Pritish V. State of Maharashtra (2001). The Apex Court observed that under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Court is not bound to conduct a preliminary inquiry. If the Court wishes to do so then, a finding should be made which would showcase that in the interest of justice, a preliminary inquiry is required in the case for the concerning offense. In the latter case, the purpose of such an inquiry is not to conclude whether the accused is guilty or innocent, instead, it is only to decide whether the inquiry is expedient in the interest of justice.[12]
   
• Jadu Nandan Singh Vs Emperor, 1910
  The Calcutta High Court in this case stressed the significance of a conservative approach that needs to be considered while setting the lawless law in stir. Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has laid down the procedure for cases that are mentioned under Section 195 of the Code, and therefore this Section sets the lawless law in stir with respect to the offenses that affect justice administration.
   
• Murray & Company vs. Ashok Kumar Newatia & Ors.
  In this case, the Supreme Court held that the practice of having false validation incorporated in an affidavit filed before a court should always be disapproved and we do now record the same. The fact that the defendant has affirmed a false affidavit before this court is rather serious and thereby rendered himself shamefaced of misprision of this court as noticed hereinbefore.
   
• Baban Singh and Anr. Vs Jagdish Singh & Ors.
  In this case, the Supreme Court held that swearing is false when a bone is bound by a pledge to state the verity because an affidavit is a declaration made under a pledge. The description of the offense of giving false validation thus applies to the affidavits.
   
• Dhananjay Sharma Vs State Of Haryana and Ors, 1994
  In this case, the Supreme Court held we're of the opinion that he is now repentant but he can't be allowed to go scot-free for the falsehood indulged into by him in this Court and for his attempt to poison the aqueduct of justice. Still, Imprisonment for a period of two months for committing misprision of court by filing false affidavits denying the allegations made in the writ supplication and the affidavit.[13]

End-Notes:

1. Law-simple and pure by Dr. Vaishali Golivadekar, criminal jurisprudence- Administration of Justice, necessity of Administration of Justice https://youtu.be/b3ZPWHXi_Do
2. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7833-340-crpc-perjury.html
3. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-856-administration-of-justice.html
4. Mittal law lectures, administration of justice and theories of punishment https://youtu.be/llV77__Sq1Y
5. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/661069/
6. https://www.writinglaw.com/chapter-xxvi-340-352-of-crpc-provisions-as-to-offences-affecting-the-administration-of-justice/
7. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1291430/
8. Criminal manual (criminal majors acts), professionals publication, p.no. 167
9. Criminal manual (criminal majors acts), professionals publication, p.no. 168
10. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1001426/
11. https://www.writinglaw.com/chapter-xxvi-340-352-of-crpc-provisions-as-to-offences-affecting-the-administration-of-justice/
12. Blog.ipleaders.in: offences against administration of justice, article by Oishika Banerjee
13. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7833-340-crpc-perjury.htm