Tuesday, May 26, 2020

Increased government action necessary during emergencies, duty of courts to ensure accountability: Justice DY Chandrachud

Source: www.financialexpress.com

To read this article online, go to link: https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/supreme-court-video-conferencing-coronavirus-medical-emergency-justice-dy-chandrachud-latest-update/1969657/

Justice DY Chandrachud said virtual court hearings cannot replace or be a substitute to physical courts as it constitutes the spine of the judicial system.

Sitting Supreme Court judge Justice DY Chandrachud said increased action on part of the government is required during a public health emergency such as the one the country is currently facing, but it is the duty of courts to ensure accountability and protect rights of citizens.
Speaking at a webinar organized by Nyaya Forum of National Academy of Legal Studies and Research, Hyderabad on the topic ‘Future of Virtual Courts and Access to Justice in India’ on Sunday, he said that all emergencies, including a public health crisis that we are in “vest substantial powers in the executive”.
“During a public health crisis, increased government action may be necessary to preserve public health and welfare. However, irrespective of governmental action and restrictions, it is above all, the duty of courts — civil, criminal and constitutional — to protect the rights of citizens and ensure governmental accountability and the rule of law,” Justice Chandrachud said.
With the coronavirus outbreak having disrupted not just normal lives but the justice delivery system as well, Justice Chandrachud, who heads the e-committee of the Supreme Court that is tasked with overseeing the digitisation of the court, said that virtual court hearings cannot replace or be a substitute to physical courts as it constitutes the spine of the judicial system.
He said virtual court hearings started because Covid-19 descended without warning and “we had no other choice”.
“I want to dissuade people from the idea that virtual court hearings are some sort of panacea. We had no choice in the pandemic but to resort to this. They will not be able to replace physical court hearings,” he said.
“We had to protect those who come to court – lawyers, litigants, media personnel, para-legal, interns,” the Justice added.
The Supreme Court is under complete shutdown due to the coronavirus threat and shifted to virtual court hearings in order to keep the virus at bay and ensure safety of lawyers, litigants and judges. In a circular issued on March 23, the court had suspended entry of lawyers and litigants inside the court premises and directed that only extremely urgent cases will be taken up for hearing. These cases are being heard by the top court video conferencing without the personal presence of lawyers.
Going by the seniority, Justice Chandrachud is in line to become the Chief Justice of India on November 9, 2022 and remain in office for a duration of two years.

Saturday, May 23, 2020

Era of virtual courts

Source: Telangana Today (online)

To read this article online, go to the link: https://telanganatoday.com/era-of-virtual-courts

Application of IT must become a key element of judicial reforms in India which has over 3 crore pending cases

Virtual courts may well become an integral part of Indian judiciary as it braces up to adopt new technologies to guide the justice delivery system in the time of coronavirus pandemic. Under the prevailing circumstances of physical distancing, the judiciary is opting for virtual modes to ensure timely delivery of justice. The Supreme Court has issued a new standard operating procedure that facilitates e-filing and virtual hearing and has also set up a helpline to assist advocates in submitting the petitions. The apex court has been holding courts through video conferencing since March 25 due to the nationwide lockdown and had suspended the entry of advocates and other staff in view of the need to maintain physical distancing. The timing of sitting of the virtual courts is notified in the respective cause lists, which is published well in advance. These are timely developments to utilise the advances in the information and communications technology to deliver justice at a crucial time and under unprecedented circumstances. It must be pointed out that many countries had embraced virtual technologies long ago for speedy and hassle-free delivery of justice. The video and audio-enabled hearings save significant court costs in terms of building, staff, infrastructure and transportation for all the parties.
The apex court’s plan to work out some kind of a mixed model of virtual and actual courts is a welcome development. There is a need to boost the infrastructure required for seamless functioning of virtual courts like robust internet connectivity, installation of large screens and error-free web applications to enable smooth videoconferencing. Reforms to reduce the burden on Indian courts have been long overdue. The coronavirus pandemic has only accentuated the urgency to use technology to find solutions that minimise physical contact and provide an affordable form of access to justice. Chief Justice of India SA Bobde has spoken about the potential of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence to help streamline the processes. The application of information technology must become one of the key elements of the judicial reforms in a country which has over three crore pending cases at various levels. Affordable technology-led solutions for easier resolution is an idea whose time has come. Technology startups engaged in innovative solutions can play a crucial role in harnessing the unlimited potential of technology to connect stakeholders in the justice delivery system and in finding solutions that are affordable and efficient. One of the key areas where these startups can disrupt the status quo is through technology-augmented solutions in remote dispute resolution. Online Dispute Resolution has the potential to become a game changer by erasing physical barriers and significantly reducing the cost of litigation.

Friday, May 22, 2020

Litigants unable to get justice through virtual courts: BCI

Source: The Tribune dated 21.05.2020

-- Satya Prakash

Public, advocates in dark as to what’s really going on in courts, says BCI.
The hearings have often been hit by technical glitches making it difficult for all the stakeholders.


As the court’s function via video-conferencing amid the COVID-19 crisis, Bar Council of India has complained that litigants were unable to get justice through virtual courts.
“Public and advocates are in the dark as to what is really going on in the various courts of the country,” said BCI which regulates the legal profession in India.
“...some people are trying to take undue advantage of lockdown and the legal profession is gradually being attempted to be highjacked by a few blessed Lawyers and selected Law-Firms who have high-level connections. The entire system is likely to go out of hands of common advocates,” BCI alleged, attributing the view to some advocates and bar associations.
In a meeting held here on Wednesday, BCI decided to consult state bar councils and bar associations on the resumption of in-person proceedings.
The Supreme Court, high courts and district courts have been functioning in a restricted manner via video-conferencing since the beginning of COVID-19 lockdown on March 24 as most of the court premises remained out of bounds for judges, lawyers and litigants alike. The hearings have often been hit by technical glitches making it difficult for all the stakeholders.
“On one hand cases of Covid-19 are increasing day by day and on the other, the problems of litigants and advocates are mounting.
Litigants are unable to get justice through the process of virtual courts...due to unsatisfactory Wi-Fi and other technical problems which are a common phenomenon. 
We cannot expect an effective hearing in this process. The public and Advocates are in the dark as to what is really going on in the various courts of the country,” BCI said.
It said the reports received from state bar councils and associations will be submitted to Chief Justice of India SA Bobde within a week.
Taking note of the difficulties faced by advocates practising in SC, BCI decided to approach the CJI and Justice DY Chandrachud, who heads the E-committee of the top court. A maximum of 5 links should be provided to the advocates of each side who apply for the links in a case, it depended.
Without consulting the Bar and without taking the Bar into confidence, if any decision is taken, the same was not going to succeed, BCI said.

Thursday, May 21, 2020

Law as weapon

Source: Indian Express dated 21.05.2020

Misuse of Epidemic Diseases Act by government must stop. Else, court must step in to protect citizens’ freedoms

A dharna in Agra over the movement of buses to ferry migrant labour led to the arrest of the Uttar Pradesh Congress chief Ajay Kumar Lallu and two of his party colleagues — all three subsequently got bail. Amongst the laws weaponised by the UP police to detain the Opposition leaders is a late-19th century statute, The Epidemic Diseases Act. Drafted by the colonial state in 1897 “to take special measures and prescribe regulations” for “the better prevention of the dangerous epidemic diseases”, the law has been summoned in the past to deal with outbreaks of cholera, swine flu and dengue. But its heavy-handed and arbitrary use, or misuse, during the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic is new. Patients, journalists and Opposition leaders have been at the receiving end of this blunt instrument that does not actually define an epidemic, leave alone a pandemic.
Of course, combating COVID-19 does require extensive surveillance, including identification of the carriers of the virus and their contacts. But in most parts of the world, including India, a growing body of literature has underlined that such extraordinary measures are best undertaken by taking citizens into confidence, using persuasion and involving the community. At several places, however, the state authorities are giving the go-by to these imperatives and asserting state power in heavy-handed ways, by taking cover under Clause 4 of the Epidemics Act — actions taken under the law are provided immunity from “legal proceedings” for they are deemed to have been “undertaken in good faith”. In early April, when knowledge of the virus was still uncertain among large sections of the people, an FIR was slapped against the family of a Bengaluru technician, who had contracted COVID-19, for “hiding information”, and they were charge-sheeted under the Epidemics Act. Also last month, the Mumbai Police invoked the law to arrest a journalist, alleging that his social media posts led to unrest among migrant workers in suburban Bandra.
A toxic mix of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, Section 144 of the CrPC and the Epidemics Act may well be on its way to becoming the new sedition law, which has been invoked with disturbing frequency in the recent past to criminalise criticism and dissent. Last week, the Gujarat government combined the sedition law with the Disaster Management Act to charge a journalist for reporting that Chief Minister Vijay Rupani may be removed by the BJP High Command for his handling of the pandemic. Also last week, this paper reported that at least four FIRs have been filed against journalists in Himachal Pradesh for highlighting the condition of stranded labourers in the pandemic. The FIRs allege that these reports are “fake” and “sensational” news; the cases are being investigated. But governments must realise that the discourse on citizens’ rights and public health has moved on from the times when the colonial government charged Bal Gangadhar Tilak for sedition for criticising its handling of the 1897 bubonic plague. Else, the Supreme Court must intervene to allow people to voice their opinions freely during a crisis, and especially in a crisis, without the threat of their being criminalised.

SC allows e-filing by AOR to save cost, paper and prevent Covid-19 spread

Source: www.livemint.com

To read this article online go to link: https://www.livemint.com/news/india/sc-allows-e-filing-by-aor-to-save-cost-paper-and-prevent-covid-19-spread-11589986472468.html

-- Japnam Bindra

The e-filing is aimed at promoting a cost and time effective system while adopting technological solutions to file cases before various courts in India


With an aim to promote paperless filing and introduce cost saving efficiencies the Supreme court allows e-filing of petitions by Advocates on record (AoR) amidst the nation-wide lockdown due to covid-19.
An AoR is an advocate who having passed a qualifying examination conducted by the Supreme Court is allowed to file petitions in the Top court.
In a first, a webinar was inaugurated by the Chief Justice SA Bobde where the e-filing module, developed by the apex court’s e-committee for online filing of cases, was unveiled. Chief Justice while speaking at the webinar said that the transition to digitization was not easy but now it is here to stay and this is the only way forward for the judicial bodies across India.
Highlighting how technology can save cost and time, Chief Justice said “Technology must be simple to use, and does not exclude any citizen anywhere. The rule of law must survive irrespective of virus. Artificial Intelligence can play a great role in organization of courts, categorization of matters and automation of courts. If we were to have this system during Ayodhya matter, then we could have dealt much more efficiently, as there were thousands of pages to go through".
Justice DY Chandrachud, Chairperson of the E-committee also spoke and said that this model of e-filing includes cost effective method where preparing huge amount of hard copies of petitions is done away with and petitions are uploaded on the portal. A 24x7 e-filing facility, incorporation of online court fee payment, use of digital signature and digitalized scrutiny mechanism for defects and objections in the petitions are few of the key features envisaged through the introduction of e-filing, said Justice Chandrachud.
An e-Filing-User Manual launched at the webinar incorporates a step by step guide to enable e-filing. In a step to reduce paper and enhance online filing, all the documents will not be uploaded on the filing portal with the signatures of the person filing the case. The manual explains in detail how digital signature can be generated and used for the filing purposes. There are two different choices to digitally sign the affirmation (An affirmation is a formal declaration made by the litigant) in a petition. One way to sign is using digital signature token provided by the Certified Authority approved under The Information Technology Act, 2000. Another way is using e-Sign facility to sign the documents. This facility provided by the Government of India (managed by CDAC exclusively). This e-Sign facility is provided free of cost especially for the litigants and lawyers who do not possess digital signature token or cannot afford to purchase such digital signature token.
The aim as mentioned in the manual states that e-filing is not just a step for ease of business but is aimed at promoting a cost and time effective system while adopting technological solutions to file cases before various courts in India.
Advocate Saurabh Ajay Gupta is one the leading AoR and arguing counsel at Supreme court and presently is also Additional Advocate General for the State of Chhattisgarh in Supreme Court. While talking to Mint, he said, “The e-filing system introduced by the Apex court is a step in the right direction. My urgent matters are being listed within short span of time and through the efficient process of e-filing."
He did add that there are initial teething problems for uploading the vast amount of documents attached with a petition. Though, the helpline set up for assistance responds immediately and is helpful.
"This system is surely time efficient once you get accustomed to it. A tech savvy person would be more comfortable handling the entire e-filing process. Additionally, the paperless transaction is a huge step to save environment and prevent paper wastage by simple digitalization of the filing process. "
Provisions have also been made to make online payment towards court fees and allied charges through Stock Holding Corporation. One can pay the Court fees by debit card, credit card or UPI or Net Banking through Atom Bank, as mentioned in the manual.
Another significant feature enlisted in the manual is that of technical assistance provided by the E-filing Resource center, where the staff is available to answer queries from 9am to 6pm IST on each business day. On the e-Filing portal there is chat facility made available through which assistance can be sought.
The manual also incorporates rules and guidelines for litigants who prefer appearing in person than through a lawyer. A party-in-person can register himself on the e-filing portal using paperless KYC mode by giving his Aadhar details.

Former Chief Justice of India shares insight into the Preamble to the Constitution of India

Source: Indian Express dated 20.05.2020

Former Chief Justice of India, Justice Dipak Mishra spoke to the students of Lloyd Law College at length in a webinar; reminded them of the ethos of the Preamble.

When you buy any product, it usually comes with a user manual- the dos and don’ts. The how-to-fix-its and the what-to-expect-out-of-its that prepare you and help you easily navigate through the usage. Democracies also come with their user manuals- a set of rules and guidelines that help you make sense in chaos, hold your hand, and lead the way. The Indian Constitution, that came into force in 1950, is one such document that used the best from democracies around the world to create a social and legal structure that captures the ethos of this country. But its heart lies in its Preamble.
During a live webinar organized by Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra, Former Chief Justice of India spoke to the students at length and reminded the future upholders of the free and fair judiciary in India of ‘The Spirit and Ethos of the Preamble to the Constitution’.
Justice Mishra spoke about how the Preamble is the heart of the great organic document that is the Constitution of India. Highlighting how it encapsulates the aspirations of the people and identifies the nature of the State that the Constitution intends to have, he emphasized how it also epitomizes the fundamental philosophy of an egalitarian society and a progressive nation. The words of the Preamble are simultaneously metaphysical and practical, and lay down the objectives upon which the foundation of this country was laid.
Revisiting the pillars of the Indian Constitution, Justice Mishra reminded the students that the Preamble, as it now stands, defines India as a sovereign, socialist, secular and democratic republic committed to giving its citizens justice, equality, liberty and fraternity with each of the words specifying the realm in which the said virtue must operate. Justice is in the sphere of social, economic and political; liberty is ensured in the realm of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship; equality is assured when it comes to the sphere of status and opportunity and fraternity promotes the dignity of individual and the unity and integrity of the nation.
“As I read the Preamble from time to time, it is not static. It encapsulates and incorporates the generational spirit that always remains in the indestructible present. To explicate, “We the people” is not a time-bound concept but a representative concept of the constant present and it includes the past and the future as well”, he said.
Apart from several other cases, Justice Mishra also cited the famous Indira Sawhney case wherein it was said that four-fold objectives are meant to secure to the citizen's justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. They display statesmanship of the highest order and the Preamble of the Constitution of India is the sentiment and key of the minds of the Constitution framers. This judgement is important because it is here that, for the first time, the Court, in clear words, said that the Preamble is the basic feature of the Constitution as it promises equality of opportunity and dignity to its citizens and ensures the State to take positive steps under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution of India.
Breaking down the other important terms in the Preamble, Justice Mishra explained what it means to be a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic.
  1. Sovereign: All power emanates from the people and the political system is accountable and responsible only to the people of this country
  2. Socialism: Meant to secure to all the people of the State people socio-economic justice by the interplay of Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy
  3. Secular: Though this term is not defined anywhere in the Constitution of India, it means that the State will have no religion and not that the State will be anti-religious or atheistic State
  4. Democratic Republic: Two words that will have to be read in a holistic manner. Democracy is a multi-faceted system; it refers to the political participation of the people in running the administration of the Government. It describes the State affairs and rule of law under which every citizen is assured the right to equal participation in the body polity.
  5. Justice: A natural concept which includes:
    • Societal justice: Abolition of inequality from society
    • Political Justice: Extinction of unreasonable distinction in political matters of the State
    • Economic Justice: Ensuring equal pay for equal work; also, equal opportunity
    1. Liberty and Fraternity: Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship; the right to express one’s choice and choose. However, liberty and freedom are not absolute. Any fetter put on liberty must be absolutely constitutionally valid.
      Fraternity emphasizes dignity and brotherhood. There can be dissent, there can be a difference of opinion, but there cannot be abuse.


Justice Mishra concluded the session by leading the students on a pledge to remain loyal to the noble ideology enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution, thereby reminding us all of why the Constitution and its Preamble is considered almost sacred in this country.

Wednesday, May 20, 2020

Supreme Court embraces AI to deliver 21st century process reforms

Source: Observer Research Foundation
https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/supreme-court-embraces-ai-to-deliver-21st-century-process-reforms-66417/

-- Gautam Chikermane (Vice President, ORF)

A transformation is underway in India’s court system. Led by the highest judiciary, this efficiency-inducing change in processes of courts such as filing, submitting extra material, payments of fees, verification practices or submissions has the potential to end the pain points of citizens while dealing with the court system. While the system needed cleansing for decades, the matrix of change that has come following the COVID19 crisis is not merely revolutionary but worthy of emulation by governments (Union and States) in their process reforms across policing, healthcare, and other public services on the one hand and registrations, compliances and filings for businesses on the other.
From 15 May 2020, the Supreme Court has shifted to a new system of filing, while guidelines for High Courts and District Courts have been drafted, circulated but not yet implemented. Once all courts are plugged into this filing system powered by artificial intelligence and other technologies, India’s courts will be able to focus more on arguing for and delivering justice than on filings and paperwork.
Using a common base of technology, a process matrix design, and leading from the front by the Supreme Court, this is an ongoing creative disruption in India’s justice system. This system uses electronic filing (e-filing) as a process tool and artificial intelligence as a reference support infrastructure, both underlined by efficiency, transparency and access to every user of court-delivery services. In other words, India’s courts are ushering in a new future-ready justice dispensation system for a 21st century India.
It also shows that the courts are in tune with and working towards developing a new filing architecture that’s in tune with a modern India. On the technological front, this is a future has already happened. COVID19 tipped the scales and pulled back the timeline. Led by Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Chairman of the Supreme Court’s eCommittee that has ushered in these process reforms and Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde under whose leadership they have been sealed, India’s courts are now plugged into this future.
Two documents, “e-Filing – User Manual” for the Supreme Court and “A Step by Step Guide for Efiling for High Courts and District Courts of India” define the details of what can be termed as process reforms in the judicial system. The driving force behind these changes are “TEST values” – Trust, Empathy, Sustainability and Transparency. While the acronym is interesting, it will be tested by time. Of the four transparency in judicial processes is here, sustainability will need to be seen over the years, empathy is too fuzzy an idea for process reforms, while trust in the system will have to be earned.
The system enables electronic filing of legal papers for civil and criminal cases across courts. This will promote paperless filing and processing, while creating time and cost saving efficiencies. The system can be used by any Advocate-on-Record enrolled to practice in the Supreme Court of India or any or Party-in-Person litigant registered with the e-filing system. For High Courts and District Courts, the system is targeted at advocates, to whom the idea is being sold as a “Digital Era Advocate”. Some High Courts, such as the Delhi High Court has allowed Party-in-Person, while others are watching in the wings.
Four key features define this system. First, the system enables 24/7 filing. Members of the bar do not have to file their cases during court hours; they can do so from home at any time, on any day. Second, it enables online communication of defects and scrutiny of matters that are filed. The system has time slots for raising the defects and seeking rectification. Third, e-payment of court fees. And fourth, introducing the digital signature for all filing-related conversations.
All four required lawyers or their clerks to stand in lines, over several counters, often standing on the knife-edge of case and process timeslots, causing delays through serial hearings in the dispensation of justice. With the new system all these are gone. Finally, for those who are not in tune with technology, the Registry Service will hand-hold them by engaging data entry operators in the Supreme Court, a system that could be used by High Courts and District Courts as and when they follow.
The artificial intelligence infrastructure on which this process speeding rests will now play a big role in the organisation of courts, categorisation of matters, process automation. It will also enable extraction of information at the rate of 1 million words per minute and can be used for the purpose of deciding a case. There is visible enthusiasm around these changes at the top. “If we had this system when the Ayodhya matter was being heard, I don’t know how fast we could have dealt with it,” Bobde said while releasing the document. “Records of thousands and thousands of pages, information from that could be extracted in a minute.”
In January 2020, around 1 lakh cases comprising approximately 26.84 lakh pages were transmitted from district courts to High Courts in India. This waste will now end and from the clients’ side, the reduction of paperwork will cut cost. The process behind the change has been tested – during the lockdown period, there were 820 matters and 552 documents filed via e-filing in the Patna High Court alone. Further, if matters are introduced in courts through e-filings, and a case is decided by trial court, the appellate court can access the entire record of the trial court along with the appeal.
The lockdown can be seen as a practice session, a compulsory training to prepare for a new working environment. Along with hearings through video-conferencing, this process reform will go a long way in sharpening the justice system, tightening costs and reducing the financial burden of justice on citizens. But it is not that all cases can or will be heard on video. Some will have to be heard in congregation.
There will be the usual protests. Clerks, for instance, will need to upgrade their skills. Thus far, their job was akin to courier firms – carting cases, taking photocopies, paying fees, and suchlike. With the entire system now online and available to every Advocate-on-Record at a tap, these skills have lost their purpose. Clerks will now have to upgrade, adapt, add value to themselves and become executive assistants. The entire bulk photocopying infrastructure and filing of paper books in courts will need to find new sources of revenue. This huge number of staff undertaking these tasks will have to embed itself into the new system – being part government servants their jobs are secure even if their tasks may change. As far as petty rent-seeking and bribery goes, it will hopefully end.
If we hear cries against this proposal, we only need to lean on the towers of history. For every change, leave alone a reform, there have been doomsday pictures painted by incumbents. When banks were computerised in the 1980s, banking unions raised a big hue and cry saying computerisation will displace jobs. But finally they upgraded themselves and settled into related jobs. As with every new system, the e-filing infrastructure too will face glitches. But those seeking a U-turn at the first challenge are going to be disappointed. While problems, as and when they come up, will be ironed out, there is no going back on this step, according to Bobde.
It is clear that riding these process reforms, India can expect speedier justice. And if that happens, the clogging of cases in courts could end. This will particularly help those with fewer resources – poor citizens, small and medium enterprises, low-cost contractual breaches, property disputes. The courts may see fewer people, as lawyers and litigants may not have to be physically present there.
And while the future direction of the court systems is clear, the past need not stand on an archaic platform. The Supreme Court should initiate a simultaneous process under which the process of digitising, in machine-readable form, should be initiated for old cases. This may take time, it may need resources. But it will complete the circle of justice the Supreme Court intends to draw.
A big challenge may come from judges themselves. The transition to reading and engaging with e-documents from paper ones, for instance, may not be as easy as planned. Referring multiple pages across varying courts will need the judges to adapt and learn new skills too. But the decisive and irreversible action combined with the efficiency-inducing intention of the change being clear, the benefits are likely to override these costs and inconveniences.
The returns from this initiative should be visible in the short-term, while outcomes such as reduced pendency should follow in the medium- to long-term timespan. While the transition could take some time before it stabilises, the vision of, and path to, paperless, efficient, AI-driven, technology-supported courts has been ushered in and action plan drawn up. With full credit and kudos to the Supreme Court for this initiative, the nation watches closely how the new system shapes up, and in turn shapes the justice system to serve a 21st century India.

Delhi High Court lawyers' chambers to open in shifts, says bar association

Source: DNA (www.dnindia.com)

Delhi High Court Bar association has released a circular with a new plan for opening lawyers' chambers.


Survey of high court advocates exposes fault lines between bar, bench; greater transparency in judicial appointments need of the hour

Source: www.firstpost.com

To read this article online go to link: https://www.firstpost.com/india/survey-of-high-court-advocates-exposes-fault-lines-between-bar-bench-greater-transparency-in-judicial-appointments-need-of-the-hour-8384291.html

-- Chitrakshi Jain (Research Fellow, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy)

In March 2020 Ranjan Gogoi, former Chief Justice of India took oath as a member of the Rajya Sabha. This event received widespread condemnation from public officials; even Gogoi's former colleagues J Lokur and J Kurien Joseph publicly criticised his acceptance of the membership as an assault on the ‘independence, impartiality and integrity’ of the judiciary. Various public intellectuals acknowledged that this would further undermine the reputation of an institution which is undergoing a crisis of legitimacy.
The judiciary has come to occupy a special place in the public life of Indian citizens. The behaviour, competence and diligence of judges are the crucial indicators which inform the legitimacy that the institution as a whole enjoys.
itigant surveys and public opinion polls have been undertaken in the past by civil society organisations to assess the level of trust that the judiciary as a public institution inspires. Practising advocates, however, are uniquely situated to assess the functioning of the judiciary.
Surveys of advocates should be distinguished from public opinion polls as advocates interact with judges on a daily basis and this allows them to better observe the conduct of the judges.
Other jurisdictions such as the USA have even institutionalised Bar polls as one of the methods to evaluate the performance of judges. In India, there has not been a single national level engagement with individual members of the Bar let alone institutionalisation of Bar polls as a routine activity.
In this context, the Justice, Access and Lowering Delays in India (JALDI) initiative of the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy commissioned ‘A Survey of Advocates Practicing Before the High Courts’. The survey was conducted across eight high courts at Allahabad, Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi, Gujarat, Kerala, Madras and Patna, and covered at least 350 advocates per high court.
Amongst other things, the survey includes questions to measure the perceptions of advocates on different aspects of judicial functioning including probity, competence, and their views on the collegium system of judicial appointments.
Perception of corruption
When asked to score the level of corruption in the judiciary on a scale of 1 to 10 where 10 indicated that corruption in the judiciary is well entrenched; 107 advocates from the Bombay High Court who chose to answer the question gave it a score of ten.
What is even more telling is the fact that 266 of the surveyed advocates from the Calcutta High Court and 254 of the surveyed advocates from the Madras High Court refused to answer this question.
It is important to mention here that the advocates who participated in the survey were assured anonymity through the letter of information before participating in the survey. It is indeed worrisome that despite this caveat, members of the Bar were reluctant to answer this question.
These responses hint at a litigation culture where the Bar and the Bench are not equally situated especially if we look at the discretion that judges enjoy under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and in the uninhibited manner that it has been exercised in the past.
Views on the collegium system of judicial appointments
Another important insight came from the advocates’ views on the functioning of the collegium system of judicial appointments wherein appointments to the higher judiciary are made on the basis of recommendation by sitting judges. The collegium system of appointments has come increasingly under public criticism for its opaque functioning. Given that practising advocates are required to appear before judges who are selected through this mechanism, it was thought useful to ask these advocates of their opinions on the continuance of the collegium system and whether they felt it required more transparency.
- Of all the advocates surveyed, 90.4 percent, 80.34 percent, 62.82 percent at the high courts of Patna, Calcutta and Gujarat, respectively felt that the collegium should continue but with greater transparency in its functioning.
- Sixty-four percent and 34.25 percent of the surveyed advocates at the high courts of Kerala and Madras, respectively, felt that the collegium system should be replaced by the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC); 60 percent of surveyed advocates at Delhi High Court too felt that the collegium system should be replaced with NJAC or another alternative system.
Scholars more than ever are recognising that judicial accountability cannot be compromised in the name of independence and these changing views find resonance in the results of our survey. The Supreme Court has time and again defended the collegium system in the name of judicial independence.
It is overwhelmingly clear from the responses to the survey across high courts that the way in which the system of appointments is currently functioning needs rethinking with a majority of the surveyed advocates demanding greater transparency in its operation.
Lately, even the practice of making available reasoned resolutions has been dispensed with. Often Bar associations have resorted to organising protests against controversial decisions taken by the collegium. Despite increasing pressure to increase transparency, the judiciary seems to be taking steps backwards on this front.
Pertinently, a significant proportion of advocates covered by the survey had between 5-10 years of experience. The views expressed in the survey also expose the fault lines between the younger members of the Bar and the old guard, and if the judiciary does not adapt to the changing times it risks deepening the crisis of legitimacy.
In this context, the voice of the Bar with regards to the judiciary’s functioning can give one useful indicators regarding the health of the institution. From the voices that one heard, it appears the institution’s well-being is in need of some urgent attention.

Tuesday, May 19, 2020

No full strength physical hearings in near future: Bombay HC

Source: Indian Express dated 19.05.2020

Chief Justice Dipankar Datta was of the firm opinion that physical courts cannot be opened in near future, said an officer-bearer of a Bar association who attended the meeting

The Bombay High Court on Monday said it will not conduct full strength in-court hearings in near future in view of Covid-19 outbreak and lockdown restrictions.
Chief Justice Dipankar Datta held a meeting on Monday to review the situation in view of the extended lockdown, along with three senior most judges forming the administrative committee of the HC, Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh and representatives of Bar associations.
CJ Datta was of the firm opinion that physical courts cannot be opened in near future, said an officer-bearer of a Bar association who attended the meeting.
The officer-bearer said the administrative judges were of the view that in the present situation, physical courts should not be opened. On demands of additional benches for videoconference hearings, the judges said that for every bench, additional staff of six-seven persons is required, which is not possible in the present scenario. However, there will be two division benches and three single benches (altogether seven judges) hearing urgent matters.
As per a circular issued by the HC, it will conduct videoconference hearing as per ongoing arrangement on May 22, 26, 29 and June 2.
The HC on Monday also directed subordinate courts in Maharashtra, Goa, Daman and Diu, Union territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli that at the district level, a committee of three judges be formed to implement safeguards to minimise spread of Covid-19 during the lockdown.
CJ Datta, through registrar general S B Agrawal, directed subordinate courts to pass judgements in cases which are posted for pronouncement and also pass suitable orders in cases which are brought before them in the form of compromise or settlement after due verification of such compromise.
Earlier in the day, two sets of senior counsels wrote separate letters to CJ Datta urging him to consider the court function with full strength with reasonable safety precautions and social distancing measures to attain normalcy in a phased manner.
A letter submitted by senior advocates Vijay Thorat, Prasad K Dakhephalkar, Vineet Naik, AV Anturkar, Prasad Dani, Atul Damle, Vishwajeet Sawant said it is unlikely that Covid-19 will be eradicated in near future and eventually one will have to accept ‘new normal’ and resume transactions with necessary restrictions.
Senior advocate Anil Sakhare, one of the signatories, said, “We know that measures like social distancing will have to become a norm. As some of the industries are opening slowly, the courts are also essential services. It can be opened in phased manner. Since an enforcement of nationwide lockdown, most cases are heard through videoconference and some lawyers do visit court for orders. The trial courts are also hearing only urgent matters.”
Another letter by senior advocates Iqbal Chagla, Janak Dwarkadas, Fredun E De Vire, Navroz Seervai, Darius Khambata and M P Bharucha urged the HC to explore ways to start sitting at full strength again and stated that court may not be able to deal with the caseload piling while it continues to conduct hearings in restricted manner.

Bombay high court not keen to resume physical court till coronavirus outbreak continues

Source: Hindustan Times

-- K A Y Dodhiya

The Bombay high court (HC) administration held a meeting presided by the chief justice and senior judges, to decide on various presentations by senior advocates and lawyers. seeking resumption of regular court and conducting physical hearings. According to members of bar associations who attended the meeting, the administration was firm in its decision that till the Covid-19 pandemic continues, physical hearings cannot be held.
In light of the onset of monsoon and denial of physical hearings, the member said that the court administration observed that it should first work out the modalities of commencing court work in a phase-wise manner.
The meeting was attended by the additional solicitor general, advocate general, and representatives of various bar associations.
According to another member of a bar association who was in attendance, the meeting centered around two major issues – having physical hearings in the HC and physical hearing in courts other than the HC.
Advocate general Ashutosh Kumbhakoni apprised the attendees about the demarcation of red, orange and green zones by the government depending on the existence of infected cases, and said that a decision regarding physical hearings would be possible only after the state government updated the list later in the evening.
The member further said that the meeting also discussed improving the quality of video conferencing wherein it was suggested to permit call conferencing if video conferencing quality was not good. However, the administrative judges did not show any inclination towards this idea.
A request was also made to increase the number of days when the court worked and the number of judges assigned to hear cases on these days.
According to the bar association member, the administrative judges said that in the current pandemic situation, allowing physical hearings would not be possible but a decision on permitting the same in courts in green zones, and other issues, would be taken only after there was clarity from the government. The decision is likely to be announced on Tuesday.

One virtual court can hear 40 cases through video-conferencing in day: SC

Source: www.newindianexpress.com

https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2020/may/18/one-virtual-court-can-hear-40-cases-through-video-conferencing-in-day-sc-2144971.html

As per earlier standard operating procedures (SOPs) notified by the apex court, only few urgent matters were getting listed for hearing before the virtual courts (VCs).


The Supreme Court Monday observed that one virtual court (VC) can hear as many as 40 matters through video-conferencing in a day.
The apex court has been holding hearings through video conferencing since March 25 due to the nationwide lockdown to contain the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19).
It had suspended the entry of advocates and other staff into the high security zone on the basis of their proximity cards, till further orders.
A bench comprising Justices R Banumathi, Indu Malhotra and Aniruddha Bose, after concluding hearings on the cases listed today, observed that 40 matters, instead of 20, can be easily heard by a bench through video conferencing if the arguing counsels leave the virtual courtroom (screen space) just after finishing their cases.
Justice Banumathi said that she will talk to Chief Justice S A Bobde on the issue.
As per earlier standard operating procedures (SOPs) notified by the apex court, only few urgent matters were getting listed for hearing before the virtual courts (VCs).
The fresh SOP issued on Sunday by the top court stated that fresh cases, which could have been listed for hearing before the pandemic-triggered lockdown, will be listed and heard first.
After the exhaustion of this pool of fresh matters, the short category matters will be listed, the circular on fresh SOP said.
The fresh SOP assumed significance as the apex court has decided to postpone its summer vacation by five weeks and declared that it would remain functional from May 18 to June 19.

Monday, May 18, 2020

SC Registry launches helpline number to provide instant solutions to queries of advocates and litigants about e-filing

Source: www.thedispatch.in

https://www.thedispatch.in/sc-registry-launches-helpline-number-to-provide-instant-solutions-to-queries-of-advocates-and-litigants-about-e-filing/

The Supreme Court Registry has launched a helpline number – 1881 – to provide instant solutions to queries of advocates and litigants about e-filing.”For the first time, at Supreme Court Registry, a helpline number (1881) will be functional from 10 am to 5 pm under the supervision of Senior Officers to provide instant solutions to queries of advocates and litigants about e-filing,” according to an official statement.
On May 15, the Supreme Court through online medium streamed a live demo on e-filing of the cases in the apex court for advocates. Now, lawyers can file cases in the top court online.Chief Justice of India (CJI) SA Bobde and Justice DY Chandrachud attended the online event.Addressing the e-meeting, CJI Bobde said that the e-filing has received impetus due to COVID-19 crisis and not entirely due to the court’s dynamism.
Speaking on the initiative to have e-filing of the cases, senior advocate Dushyant Dave, President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) said, “I am delighted at the efforts of the Supreme Court to digitise its functioning. These are times of crisis and we have to rise in these times of crisis. Today, the people of India need the healing touch your lordships.”

Combination of virtual, physical courts will be way forward: CJI

Source: Times of India

-- Dhananjay Mahapatra

To read this article, go to link: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/75796059.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst



Saturday, May 16, 2020

E-filing will bring court registry to lawyers’ chamber, make work simpler: CJI Bobde

Source: www.hindustantimes.com

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/e-filing-will-bring-court-registry-to-lawyers-chamber-make-work-simpler-cji-bobde/story-93l6LEVUCjEQp4gnOL5RrK.html

He was speaking at an online demonstration of the new e-filing module which will be rolled out by the Supreme Court in the near future.

E-filing of cases will effectively bring the court registry to the offices of lawyers and will make their work simpler and more efficient, Chief Justice of India (CJI) SA Bobde said on Friday.
He was speaking at an online demonstration of the new e-filing module which will be rolled out by the Supreme Court in the near future.
“E-filing has virtually brought the court registry into the chamber of advocates and nothing can be simpler once the steps are understood. E-filing will make the work simpler and more efficient,” Justice Bobde said.
E-filing, he said, received an impetus due to the Covid-19 lockdown which necessitated social distancing and there would be no looking back now.
“We will have to accept the present situation and change our mindset towards the way we look at court proceedings. Half the battle is won with the change of mindset. It is easy to learn but difficult to unlearn.”
The event was also attended by the chairperson of the e-committee, Justice DY Chandrachud who said that e-filing will enhance the rights of citizens to efficient justice delivery.
“We are conscious of the fact that not every lawyer has access to technology. As we age, so we become a little more diffident about the use of technology. So our solutions must factor this in order to ensure that we continue to be an inclusive institution and reach out to those who do not have access to technology,” he said.
Towards this end, the court registry will do “handholding” by engaging data entry operators who will take up the work of data entry and filing so that lawyers do not feel handicapped by the e-filing process, he said.
The new e-filing module which will be introduced for filing cases in the Supreme Court will provide personalized information to every advocate-on-record of cases which have been filed by them, their own list of cases, details of pleadings filed by them and pleadings filed by others in cases in which they appear.

The service will be available round the clock which would mean that a lawyer can file a case anytime of the day and any day irrespective of whether the registry is working or not.
“The mission is to provide facilities for inexpensive and effective access to justice. Rule of law must survive very strongly and operate at all times irrespective of coronavirus,” CJI Bobde said.

Friday, May 15, 2020

Calcutta HC Issues Guidelines For Functioning Of Court Post Lockdown

Source: www.indialegallive.com

https://www.indialegallive.com/constitutional-law-news/courts-news/calcutta-hc-issues-guidelines-for-functioning-of-court-post-lockdown-99227

The High Court of Calcutta has issued several guidelines for the post lockdown functioning of court. At the outset it has been made clear that Court can resume physical functioning in a restricted form only after the transport services particularly suburban trains and public transports system are resumed.
With respect to hearing of matters, the following guidelines have been issued:
  • Mentioning will be allowed only by way of Video Conference between 4.30 pm and 5 pm on every working day, restricted to six or seven Courts at a time. Mentioning schedules will be announced in advance on the High Court Website for the convenience of all concerned.
  • Benches will sit on a staggered basis; every Bench will indicate a cluster of four to six matters which will be taken up in Courts on every hour of sitting. If such matters are exhausted, other matters scheduled later in that day will not be taken up during such time.
  • Apart from the Judges on the Bench, three Court staff will be present in every Court room at any given point of time. No more than six lawyers and litigants will be allowed entry into any Court room at any given point of time.
  • The Lawazima Court will publish a list of limited number of matters. Times will also be indicated so that the Lawazima Court is not crowded.
Apart from these the Court has issued other general guidelines:
  1. Not more than 25 per cent of the sitting capacity in any library room will be allowed.
  2. All lifts will be functional. However, no more than three persons will be allowed on the smaller lifts and not more than five persons will be allowed on the bigger lifts at a time.
  3. For the time being, the canteens and refreshment services in the High Court premises will not resume.
  4. Only two of the entry gates to the High Court Main Building will be open.
The Court has however clarified that if “physical functioning of the Court resumes but it is observed that the distancing and health and hygiene advisories are not been met, the Chief Justice may be constrained to stop the physical functioning of Court.”