When the lockdown to contain the spread of the coronavirus was announced in March, it came as a huge disruptive shock. Most offices and act...
When the lockdown to contain the spread of the coronavirus was announced in March, it came as a huge disruptive shock. Most offices and activities were brought to a sudden halt. But enterprises soon began to use internet and e-platforms to allow employees to work from home.
The Supreme Court also started hearings using the internet and e-platforms. Considerable work on this had been done by an e-committee headed by Justice DY Chandrachud. However, virtual proceedings were mostly restricted to urgent hearings in High Courts and Supreme Court. There was also a very selective, arbitrary method for deciding what constituted an urgent matter. In addition, most subordinate courts did not adopt this practice. As a consequence, the backlog of cases has been mounting.
It has been well established that judicial and quasi-judicial hearings over internet are feasible and work reasonably well. There are a few glitches that could be resolved as the system evolves. Incidentally, the Central Information Commission has been routinely holding hearings over internet with tapplicants and the officials being in different parts of the country for over a decade.
The benefits
Virtual hearings in courts would result in lower costs for litigants and ease of operations for most lawyers. Instead of wasting hours...
