“Sunlight is the best disinfectant,” the Apex Court had observed in Sept 2018 in a judgment that paved the way for live streaming of court proceedings. 2 years down the line, CJI SA Bobde on Monday said that in practice, live streaming will be misused as he is already facing several complaints over the virtual hearing taking place over the videoconferencing app VIdyo.
Sharing thoughts on live-streaming as part of suo moto proceedings for Court’s functioning during Coronavirus pandemic, Justice Bobde, heading a 3-Judge bench said, “In principle, I agree that there should be live streaming but in practice, you must hear me. As CJI, I have to deal with so many complaints over the virtual court proceedings.”
The observation followed a suggestion by Attorney General KK Venugopal who insisted that since the High Court of Gujarat had taken the lead in live-streaming the proceedings, the Top Court can follow suit. In Sept 2018, the Apex Court had considered this issue in a Public Interest Litigation filed by Swapnil Tripathi & gave it’s go-ahead considering all constitutional aspects involved in this exercise.
Venugopal reminded CJI, “Now there is a judgment requiring the Court to have live-streaming. I was satisfied watching the live streaming of proceedings in the Gujarat High Court.” The bench, also comprising Justices DY Chandrachud & LN Rao said, “There can be some negative use or abuse of live streaming.” Justice Chandrachud, who heads the e-committee of the Top Court responsible for enhancing virtual court proceedings, told Venugopal that a delay of twenty seconds occurs between the live streaming & actual proceedings in the Gujarat HC. This ensures a check on nothing untoward going live.
Justice Chandrachud revealed that at present the Supreme Court is focusing on enhancing the video conferencing facility.
Justice Chandrachud said that “The idea is to have one video conferencing facility for all High Courts & district courts & a separate facility for Supreme Court. Bids have been invited for managing the entire videoconferencing facility".
The rules for conducting such hearing have been finalised by a committee of HC Judges. District Courts too would be able to virtually record evidence during trial as 11 out of 25 HC's have adopted these rules as per area-specific requirements & changes. The remaining High Courts have the option to adopt Rules framed by the e-committee, the bench said.
For better connectivity, the CJI sought Centre’s help to access optical fibre network. “In states which do not have fibre optics coverage, we have to rely on satellites,” CJI Bobde said. The Supreme Court e-committee is also working on setting up E-Seva Kendras, one each in over 3,300 Court complexes across the country, to provide easy access to lawyers who face difficulties in accessing virtual courtrooms.
On the aspect of providing optical fibre network, Senior Lawyer Harish Salve, who was appearing in another case, entered the matter through videoconferencing & offered help on behalf of his client, Reliance Jio. Though Jio is not party to the current proceedings, Salve said, “My client Jio has the best optical fibre network & they offer it at an inexpensive rate.”
The bench allowed Salve to tell his client to formally make an offer to the e-committee. The Court also entertained an application filed by senior advocate Vikas Singh, who suggested that even when the Court resumes physical hearing during normal days, videoconferencing should be continued for a certain category of cases with waiting room facility for lawyers & kiosks for media persons to witness the proceedings virtually.
Source Link
Picture Source :
