New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday directed all High Courts to ensure that no member of the Bar is denied access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through hybrid facility. The apex court stressed that all judges in the country have to realise that technology is no longer a matter of choice and that technology is part of the legal system.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) and comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said after the lapse of two weeks from this order, no High Court should deny access to video conference facility or hearing through a hybrid facility to any Bar member. Regarding issues with the hybrid system in place at Bombay High Court, the Chief Justice told the advocate general of Maharashtra Dr Birendra Saraf, “We have been informed that Bombay High Court has disbanded all the video equipment from the High Court. No hearings are taking place through the video conferencing platform. Why is the High Court in one of the premier financial centres of the country so retrograde on technology, tell us that”.
The advocate general said he thinks facilities are available in the courtroom and doesn’t think facilities have been disbanded. Saraf added that he doesn’t think that screen or other things have been removed from the courtrooms. The CJI said expect Justice Gautam Patel nobody else uses the hybrid mode and nobody uses video conferencing.
The CJI said, “Why would not the other judges adopt the same technology? What is the aversion to using technology, if Justice Gautam Patel can do it surely other judges can also do it…..technology is not a matter of choice, I think all judges of the country have to realise that technology is no longer a matter of choice. Technology is part of our legal system, our resources…..without technology how do we function”.
The CJI said the Bombay High Court is in the premiere financial centre of the country and surely, it must become something consistent with the march in technology, “We can’t say that we are over 150 years old, we will still perform our functions as we did 150-years ago.”
The CJI said somebody wrote to him that one of the young lawyers was sitting in the court and she was told by the judges to stop using the iPad. The CJI said, “Somebody who is using the iPad in the court is not watching a movie. They use the iPad to use liquid text or assist a senior….we should not be telling advocates to shut down their iPads or their laptops when they come to court".
Also read: When Chief Justice of India received saree for mother as lawyer fee
The CJI stressed that in fact, we should have internet in the courtroom and High Courts must have internet facilities on the court premises, as it is available across the apex court. During the hearing, CJI expressed his disappointment as many High Courts have failed to provide adequate facilities for video conferencing despite funds being allocated by the Centre for the same. The Chief Justice said every High Court must make video conferencing facilities available and no judge in the High Court shall decline hybrid.
The CJI said Allahabad High Court is a complete offender and the infrastructure has been completely shut down, and pointed out that Kerala and Odisha have been faring better in comparison to other High Courts in adapting to technology. The top court was hearing a plea by Sarvesh Mathur, who was appearing in person.
On September 15, Mathur submitted before the apex court that Punjab and Haryana High Court is not allowing video conferencing for which the entire infrastructure had been created and was working during the COVID-19 pandemic, but after that, they have completely stopped it. Mathur stressed the High Court has completely disbanded the use of video conferencing facilities.
The bench had then issued notice to the registrar general of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and also issued notices to all registrar generals of the High Courts, which shall be communicated by the registrar judicial through e mail. All registrar general intimate to this court, whether hearings in the hybrid mode are being allowed, whether the facility has been disbanded”, the top court had ordered.
