CJI DY Chandrachud's Strong Message To HC CJs : Don't Disband Hybrid Hearing Option, Technology Was Not Only For Pandemic Time

While hearing a plea seeking to declare virtual hearings a fundamental right, CJI DY Chandrachud expressed his anguish towards Chief Justices of High Courts who have started disbanding the infrastructure for virtual hearings. CJI Chandrachud, who has been a strong advocate for the use of technology in the judiciary and has emphasized the importance of virtual hearings in promoting access to justice, stated–

"Whether you are pro-technology or not, all Chief Justices of High Courts need to learn that technology is to be used."

CJI DY Chandrachud highlighted that massive budget had been allocated which has to be utilised.

"In the third phase of e-courts project, in the last budget which has been declared by the Union Government, Rs 7000 crores is made available. That of course will be used for improving the infrastructure in all the district courts also. I will tell you the problem. Some of the Chief Justices are doing this and I'm very deeply disturbed by this. What some of the Chief Justices are doing is, all the money which we have spent, they're just disbanding the technological infrastructure which we have created for virtual hearings. I am very deeply disturbed by some of the High Courts doing this. Irrespective of whether a Chief Justice is technology friendly or not, this is not how you deal with public money. You have to ensure that infrastructure is available".

Judges cannot insist on physical presence of lawyers by saying that the are coming to court, CJI underscored.

"The other view point is "we judges come for physical hearing so why should lawyers appear online?". That begs the point. The conditions in which judges come to work are very different from what lawyers face".

Chief Justices duty bound to spend public funds

When S Prabhkaran, Vice President of the Bar Council of India, said that technological access is difficult in rural areas, CJI replied : "You are right Mr.Prabhakaran. Therefore, let us not ban technology. The answer is make technology available in the grassroots. We are with you. We must ensure that technology reaches every taluka court in the country. That is why as part of phase 3 of e-courts project, we are setting up e-seva kendras in every court establishments. So if a lawyer has no access to technology, a lawyer can go to an e-seva kendra and get all the facilities which are available. E-Committee has entered into a MoU with the Common Services Centres Corporation so that all our services are available at the level of villages and panchayats".

"So, we must reach out. Unfortunately what is happening is,  this should not depend on whether a particular Chief Justice of the High Court takes interest or not.  You may not take interest. You may not understand anything of technology. But you are duty bound to spend public funds, which have been made available by the Government of India to foster the mission to increase access to justice".

Some Tribunals also disbanding technology.

CJI also took exception to some tribunals also disbanding technology.

"Likewise, some tribunals are also disbanding. As if they're saying, technology was only for pandemic. Technology was not only for pandemic. It's here to stay here for future. We'll formulate an order and pass".

The CJI also remarked that–

"Parliamentary committee was extremely receptive. I was a puisne judge then- I made a presentation for almost three hours. It was the first time Parliamentary committee came to the Supreme Court. It was during the period of CJI Ramana. We had a detailed discussion. The parliamentary committee made a very strong report on the need for funds for judiciary. Now 7000 crores have been allocated for the judiciary. These funds are not for our personal use. We will put everything in the order. We will also say that the High Court Chief Justices should take this mission forward".

HCs cannot turn away from technology

When a lawyer submitted that the new SoP of the Madhya Pradesh High Court does not give virtual option despite spending money on e-courts, CJI said :

"I will tell you the problem lies when you have Chief Justices who think technology is friendly and other Chief Justices think other-way. I am going to ensure that everybody is online. There is no question of 'I like technology, I don't'. Can anyone now say I won't use cellphone? This technological infrastructure has been created using public funds. All Chief Justices of the High Courts need to learn that they have to be on board. There are no exceptions".

CJI also acknowledged that there is a technological divide in the country and that there are lawyers who face difficulties.

"Our mission is to reach out to people. Recently we started e-SCR. This was for those lawyers who cannot afford private software. Lawyers who cannot understand English, we will translate judgments for them- technology is doing that. IIT Madras is helping us- we're using it for machine translation".

CJI told BCI Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra and Vice President S Prabhakaran, "ʼYou tell us what all we should do to ensure that we provide these services down to every lawyer in the country at the first level. What should we do? You formulate. We want your assistance for this mission. Even if you don't have access to technology, you wouldn't be left out of the race- nothing like that".

CJI also asked BCI Chairperson Mr Manan Kumar Mishra to get a response for bar councils for states, and stated that an order will be framed soon in the matter.

Advocates Sriram Parakkat and Siddharth R Gupta, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that some High Courts have stopped the option of hybrid hearings. 

The option of hybrid hearing increases access to justice for litigants from far flung places and reduces cost of litigation, submitted Sriram. Although the technical apparatus has already been set up, many High Courts have stopped the hybrid option, he said.

BCI Chairperson said that the issue had far-reaching ramifications and hence required the views of state bar councils and High Court bar associations.

Recently, another bench led by Justice Kaul had reminded courts and tribunals to facilitate hybrid hearing by making use of the money spent on technological upgradation.

Case Title: All India Association of Jurists And Anr. v. High Court of Uttarakhand And Ors W.P.(C) No. 941/2021, National Federation for Societies for Fast Justice and others vs Union of India W.P.(C) No. 1051/2021 and connected cases.