Skip to main content

Covid 19: Information Technology and Indian Judicial System (Before, During & After)

Government of India had imposed a 40-day lockdown in entire country to curb the spread of Coronavirus, which has already toppled the bigs and wigs of the world. Only essential services are allowed to function during this lockdown period. In these bizarre times, Indian judiciary has excellently responded to the crisis by suspending judicial work, except for urgent matters. To cater the requirement of social distancing, courts are functioning through video-conferencing and e-filing of files and documents. Even the fresh urgent matters are being filed electronically. Regarding the condonation of limitation for filing routine matters, kindly see my article Interpretation of the Supreme Court's order on law of limitation during the period of Covid-19.

Taking a historical step forward, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India bench comprising of Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice L.N. Rao issued certain directions to reorganize the functioning of courts via video conferencing during lockdown. This perhaps, can be termed the only positive derived during the depressant times of Covid-19. These are hailed as welcome steps as they update country’s obsolete and outdated processes adopted in Indian judicial system. However, the intricacies with which they have been implemented, stress upon the fact that judiciary’s renovation should be the first and utmost priority of the courts when they resume usual functioning.

Videoconferencing is the need of the hour, keeping in view the time, money and efforts of the litigants, particularly when the litigant is required to travel a long distance to attend his hearing. With the advancement of technology in last 10 years or so, the ordinary citizens of country are well equipped to stream videos, and there should be no justification why the judicial system should not adopt the same. Live streaming of court proceedings is the need of the hour and even Supreme Court had acknowledged it in a recent judgment.

The Supreme Court, in the beginning, tried a US government based application called VIDYO. However, on facing linking issues, asked the lawyers to use Skype, Facetime and Whatsapp instead. E-filing was ordered to done via E-mail, where taking a first, Punjab and Haryana High Court provided E-Mail addresses and phone numbers of all judicial officers under its jurisdiction. However, these are all momentary solutions and once normalcy prevails, judicial system should be provided with a platform comprising e-filing and video-conferencing, under the able guidance of National Informatics Center. Already e-courts website and application are available, but in absence of promotion, most of the litigants are not aware of its existence. As such, necessary steps shall also be required to be taken to make general public aware of such services, which in turn shall assist police and courts to administer justice effectively.

If such transition happens ever, it shall be faced with challenges galore. Firstly, the decision whether to include pending matters in the electronic form, is going to be tough one as answer in positive shall not only make the process cumbersome and time consuming but also the element of fraud cannot be ruled out. In case, the answer being in negative and paper files of pending matters are allowed to carry on, the transition phase may extend over a considerable time to take full effect. Secondly, the intricacies of law, particularly relating to proving a document in court, shall require amendment as the existing law is quite convoluted. Indian Evidence Act, originally derived from British Act, has not been amended in regard to proving a document in court, though British Act is quite liberal in this aspect. Many such problems shall be faced with during and after transition phase but they shall have to be taken in stride so that judicial system remains prepared if faced with any such state of affairs again.

It is regrettable that the elements of information technology in the judicial system have presented themselves under such calamitous circumstances, but as they say “necessity is the mother of invention” once normalcy prevails and pandemic Covid-19 is controlled, the judiciary will be presented with an opportunity to reinvent the judicial system which they need to grab with both hands.


The author is a B.Com, LL.B (Hons), LL.M, Advocate, practicing at District Courts, Ludhiana. He can be reached at kalia.advocate@gmail.com. Views expressed herein are personal views of author. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Law relating to WILLS in India

There is a saying “Where there is a Will, there is a way”. However, in absence of a properly-executed Will, the ways ahead may be too complicated to handle. Bigwig families in India like Ambanis, Birlas, and Ranbaxy brothers will not disagree that the road to succession is generally paved with ill Will chronicles. Will planning as part of financial management, has not assumed that much relevance in India what it should actually have. By making a Will one can assuredly rest that his properties devolve as desired and the rightful heirs receive their share. According to the Indian Succession Act 1925, a Will is a legal declaration of the intention of the testator, with respect to his property which he/she desires to be put into effect after his/her death. Post death of a person, two scenarios arise in respect of his property; (a) as per his Will i.e. testamentary, or (b) according to the prevalent law of succession, when no Will is made. In the event of an individual dying intestate ...
1 comment
Read more

Interpretation of Order 8 Rule 1 CPC: Latest law on limitation for filing written statement

In this article, I shall interpret the law regarding filing of written statement, governed by order 8 Rule 1 CPC, with the aid of laws laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in this regard. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while interpreting Order 8 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, had settled the law that the provision to file Written Statement within 30 days (further extendable to 90 days) from date of service of summons, is directory in nature and not mandatory. Lawyers across the country, have been relying on the two judgments of Supreme Court "Kailash v. Nankhu" {( 2005 ) 4 SCC  480 }  and "Salem Advocates Bar Association, T.N. v. Union of India" {( 2005 ) 6 SCC  344 }  which hold that that procedural law is for effective administration of justice and is not above the justice. These judgments have been referred while filing applications to condone delay in filing Written Statement beyond the limit of 90 days as prescribed in CPC. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Supreme Court on Sec.138 NI Act: No need for Complainant to produce Account Books during Criminal Trial.

The Supreme Court, in one of its recent judgement, has observed that the production of the account books/cash book may not be relevant in a criminal case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE In the present case, the First Appellate Court reversed the Trial Court order in which the accused was convicted. The Appellate Court had held that the complainant didn't produce cash and account books to prove that the amount was due and payable by the accused. The complaint was that the accused purchased the pesticides on credit from the company and made part payments by issuing a cheque, which when presented for collection returned with the endorsement "insufficient funds". The High Court, on the other hand, restored the Trial Court judgement and observed that "the reason was given by the Lower Appellate Court that he didn't bring the cash book or order book, etc. could well be understood, if civil suit is tried"...
1 comment
Read more