The judge decided the case in Shanti's favour only on the basis of the evidence before the court. The judge did not jump to the conclusion that Shanti was the thief just because she was a poor maid servant. Instead, the judge remained impartial. Since, the evidence showed that the gold chain was stolen by some young men and not Shanti, he set Shanti free.

The role of the judge in the criminal justice system are as follows:
(i) The judge has a key role in the criminal justice system because it is the judge who decides whether the accused is guilty or innocent. He/she does this after conducting the trial impartially in an open court.
(ii) The judge hears all the witnesses and any other evidence presented by the prosecution and the defence.
(iii) The judge finally decides whether the accused person is guilty or innocent on the basis of the evidence presented and in accordance with the law.

No, the victims will not get justice if only one person performed all the functions of the criminal justice system. If one person performed all the functions, there would not be any scope for fairness. The person may be influenced by several prejudices and there would be no one to check his/her abuse of Power

Shanti would have been considered guilty even before the beginning of the trial. The trial would have been biased against her and even tually she would have been pronounced guilty. She would not have got justice.

Basis of evidence means the information provided by witnesses and other objects, which is used to arrive at a decision or judgement.

No, it was not legal for the police to detain Shanti's brother Sushi!. It violates the DK Basu Guidelines

According to Article 22 of the Indian Constitution, every citizen has the Fundamental Right to be defended by a lawyer. This means that every person, even if he/she is accused in a crime, is entitled to present his/her case in the court. This shows that our courts give impartial judgement. They give the accused every opportunity to prove his/her innocence.
The Judiciary does not jump to the conclusion tha the accused is the culprit. The judge remains impartial and gives judgement solely on the basis of evidence produced in the court. From this, I have also learnt the importance of being impartial and arriving at a decision only after examining both sides of the matter.

Yes, Shanti did get a fair trial. Firstly, Shanti has given a copy of the charge sheet and all other evidence that the prosecution presented against her. Shanti was charged with the offence of theft that was defined as a crime in the law. The trial was held in an open court in public view. Her brother could attend the court hearings.
Shanti's lawyer was given an opportunity to cross-examine all the prosecution witnesses.
Although the police filed a case of theft against Shanti, the judge assumed her to be innocent. The judge decided the matter only on the basis of the evidence before the court. The evidence showed that some young men and not Shanti was the thief. In Shanti's case, justice was finally done to her because she was given a fair trial.