"Now We Have VC, A Lawyer From Anywhere In The Country Can Address Us": Supreme Court On Plea Seeking Regional Benches
While disposing of a petition seeking operationalisation of Article 130 of the Constitution of India, 1950 by establishing regional Benches of the Supreme Court, on Friday, Supreme Court indicated that the issue of accessibility has now been addressed by the Video Conferencing mechanism. "Now we have Video conferencing, a lawyer from anywhere in the country can address us",...
While disposing of a petition seeking operationalisation of Article 130 of the Constitution of India, 1950 by establishing regional Benches of the Supreme Court, on Friday, Supreme Court indicated that the issue of accessibility has now been addressed by the Video Conferencing mechanism.
"Now we have Video conferencing, a lawyer from anywhere in the country can address us", Justice Chandrachud, the presiding judge of the bench, orally remarked.
The petition filed by NGO, Lok Prahari was argued by its General Secretary, Mr. S.N. Shukla. At the outset, the Bench comprising Justice Chandrachud and Hima Kohli expressed reluctance to proceed with the matter, stating that the setting up of regional Benches of the Supreme Court is the discretion of the Chief Justice of India, which cannot be claimed as a matter of right in a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution.
"Mr. Shukla, what is your right under A. 130? It is for the CJI to decide", the bench asked.
Article 130 of the Constitution contemplates that the Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places, as the Chief Justice of India may, with approval of the President, from time to time appoint.
Justice Chandrachud added that there are already two Full Court decisions of the Supreme on the issue.
Mr. Shukla defended his petition by apprising the Bench that the proposal in his Public Interest Litigation is constitutionally permissible, it is simpler and easy to implement. He submitted that there is another similar petition before the Apex Court pending adjudication.
Justice Chandrachud stated that the issue in the pending matter is unrelated to the demands of Lok Prahari in the present petition.
"That is on different issue altogether. That is Court of Appeal."
On the issue of accessibility, Justice Kohli opined -
"We now have Counsels logging in from all parts of the country, from their offices and homes..."
The Bench refused to entertain the present petition, which was filed on the basis of a Law Commission Report published in 2009. It remarked -
"You are relying on 229th Law Commission report which came out in 2009. 12 years later technology has changed."
The pending matter referred to by Mr. Shukla is the petition seeking reliefs for the division of Supreme Court into appellate and Constitutional divisions with regional benches for the former. In 2016, framing 11 questions of law, a three-judge Bench of the Apex Court had referred the matter to a Constitution Bench. When the matter was listed last month (August, 2022) before the Constitution Bench, Attorney General for India, Mr. K.K. Venugopal had sought time to get instructions from the Centre.