No High Court shall impose an age requirement or any other arbitrary criteria for availing of virtual/hybrid hearings : SC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Writ Petition (Criminal) No 351 of 2023
Sarvesh Mathur Petitioner
Versus
The Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana Respondent
Three Judge bench of hte supreeme court comprising of Justices, [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud,
[J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra in order dated October 06, 2023 , held as below....
6 As regards the NCLAT, it has been stated that infrastructural requirements
have to be upgraded and funds have been sought from the Union Government.
The Additional Solicitor General states that requisite funds shall be made available
to the NCLAT. We direct that a joint meeting be held between the Secretaries of the
Ministries of Finance and Corporate Affairs with the President of the NCLAT within a
period of one week and that all pending issues, including the availability of funds
are sorted out so as to enable the NCLAT to conduct hybrid hearings.
Simultaneously, a meeting shall also be held with the Chairperson of the National
Company Law Tribunal4
within a period of two weeks. The NCLAT and NCLT shall
ensure that hybrid hearings are made available at the option of the appearing
4 NCLT
4
lawyers, or the litigants, as the case may be, within a period of four weeks from the
date of this order.
....
9 From the discussions which have taken place before the Court, it is evident
that there is a considerable variation between High Courts in the level of adoption
of technology. Some High Courts have made considerable progress and hearings
are being provided through the hybrid mode or video conferencing. Other High
Courts have stated that facilities are available. However, when the statistics in
regard to the actual number of hearings through video conferencing/hybrid mode
have been disclosed, it appears that the performances are abysmal. For instance, in
one High Court, as few as 3 hearings have been conducted in the virtual mode in
the last three months.
10 In most High Courts, the problem is compounded by the absence of a uniform
SOP which brings clarity to the manner in which access to the electronic mode of
hearing can be obtained. An application for electronic access has to be submitted
well in advance, in certain cases, three days before the date of commencement of
the hearing. The arbitrariness of the existing SOPs is also borne out by rules such
as hearing being allowed in hybrid mode for advocates/parties-in-person who are
65 years of age or above. The age restriction would unfairly disadvantage younger
lawyers and restrict access to technology only in the hands of the seniors at the
Bar. Such criteria do not bear any nexus to the aim of using technology to increase
access to courtrooms.
...
11 Further, most High Courts do not provide Wi-Fi or internet connectivity to the
members of the Bar and litigants within the precincts of the High Court. In the
absence of adequate connectivity, it is not possible for the members of the Bar and
litigants to access the internet within the precincts of the High Courts. Links for
video conferencing hearings are not provided in the cause-list. Many High Courts
have not yet adopted online filings which would complement the hearings through
video conferencing or in the hybrid mode. We are also concerned about the
absence of adequate internet activity in the North-East States.
12 During the course of the hearing, it has also emerged that whereas several
High Courts do have facilities for video conferencing, very few High Courts are
operating through the hybrid mode of hearing. The infrastructure which is required
for conducting hybrid hearings may be of a different order as compared to the
infrastructure for video conferencing.
...
14 In this backdrop, we issue the following directions:
7
(i) After a lapse of two weeks from the date of this order, no High Court
shall deny access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through
the hybrid mode to any member of the Bar or litigant desirous of
availing of such a facility;
(ii) All State Governments shall provide necessary funds to the High Courts
to put into place the facilities requisite for that purpose within the time
frame indicated above;
(iii) The High Courts shall ensure that adequate internet facilities, including
Wi-Fi facilities, with sufficient bandwidth are made available free of
charge to all advocates and litigants appearing before the High Courts
within the precincts of the High Court complex;
(iv) The links available for accessing video conferencing/hybrid hearings
shall be made available in the daily cause-list of each court and there
shall be no requirement of making prior applications. No High Court
shall impose an age requirement or any other arbitrary criteria for
availing of virtual/hybrid hearings;
(v) All the High Courts shall put into place an SOP within a period of four
weeks for availing of access to hybrid/video conference hearings. In
order to effectuate this, Justice Rajiv Shakdher, Honble Judge of the
High Court of Delhi is requested to prepare a model SOP, in conjunction
with Mr Gaurav Agrawal and Mr K Parameshwar, based on the SOP
which has been prepared by the e-Committee. Once the SOP is
prepared, it shall be placed on the record of these proceedings and be
circulated in advance to all the High Courts so that a uniform SOP is
8
adopted across all the High Courts for facilitating video
conference/hybrid hearings;
(vi) All the High Courts shall, on or before the next date of listing, place on
the record the following details:
(a) The number of video conferencing licences which have been
obtained by the High Court and the nature of the hybrid
infrastructure;
(b) A court-wise tabulation of the number of video conference/hybrid
hearings which have taken place since 1 April 2023; and
(c) The steps which have been taken to ensure that Wi-Fi/internet
facilities are made available within every High Court to members
of the Bar and litigants appearing in person in compliance with
the above directions.
(vii) The Union Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology is directed
to coordinate with the Department of Justice to ensure that adequate
bandwidth and internet connectivity is provided to all the courts in the
North-East and in Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu and
Kashmir so as to facilitate access to online hearings;
(viii) All High Courts shall ensure that adequate training facilities are made
available to the members of the Bar and Bench so as to enable all
practising advocates and Judges of each High Court to be conversant
with the use of technology. Such training facilities shall be set up by all
9
the High Courts under intimation to this Court within a period of two
weeks from the date of this order; and
(ix) The Union of India shall ensure that on or before 15 November 2023, all
tribunals are provided with requisite infrastructure for hybrid hearings.
All Tribunals shall ensure the commencement of hybrid hearings no
later than 15 November 2023. The directions governing the High Courts
shall also apply to the Tribunals functioning under all the Ministries of
the Union Government including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, AFT,
NCDRC, NGT, SAT, CAT, DRATs and DRTs.
...
16 Above all, it must be noted that technology plays an essential role in securing
access to courtrooms and as a result, access to justice for citizens across the
country. Lawyers and litigants using electronic gadgets to access files and legal
materials cannot be asked to turn the clock back and only refer to paper books. In
the march of technology, the Courts cannot remain tech averse. Placing fetters on
hybrid hearings, like mandating an age criteria, requiring prior application, and
frequent denial of access to virtual participants has the direct effect of discouraging
lawyers and litigants to use technology. Not only does this affect the efficiency and
access to courts, but it also sends out the misguided message that access to courts
can be restricted at whim to those who seek justice.
5 APTEL
10
17 The use of technology by the Bar and the Bench is no longer an option but a
necessity. Members of the Bench, the Bar and the litigants must aid each other to
create a technologically adept and friendly environment. The above directions must
be implemented by all concerned stakeholders in letter and in spirit.