'Issued Unilaterally': SCBA Moves Supreme Court Against SOP For Resumption Of Hybrid Physical Hearings

The plea filed though Advocate Rahul Kaushik stated that the impugned SOP dated March 5 has been issued by the Registry without consultation with the Bar. The plea states, SCBA Treasurer Meenesh Kumar Dubey is the second petitioner. 

"Bar is an equal stakeholder in the dispensation of the Justice Delivery System and the suggestions given by the Bar ought to have been taken into consideration."

The plea avers that in the meeting of the Executive Committee of the SCBA with the CJI, held on March 1, regarding the physical/hybrid hearing, it was assured that the needful would be done by the Registry expeditiously taking into consideration the suggestions given by the Executive Committee. However, it is claimed, that the impugned SOP has been issued "unilaterally" by the Registry.

The plea further said that there is general feeling in the Bar that for the last few years, the Supreme Court Registry has been issuing Circulars without taking the Bar into confidence, even though such circulars directly affect the Lawyers practicing.

Supreme Court of India had issued its Standard Operating Procedure dated 5th March, directing resumption of hybrid court hearings from 15th March. The Court issued several directions regarding its functioning in consideration of the ongoing Covid 19 pandemic and suggestions given by the Bar Associations.

The Court devised a pilot scheme to hear cases in the hybrid mode on an experimental basis. According to the scheme, the final hearing and regular matters listed on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays will be heard in the hybrid mode , after consideration of the number of parties in a matter and the limited capacity of the Court rooms. However all other matters, including those listed on Mondays and Fridays will continue to be heard through video -conferencing mode.

On Saturday, the SCBA decided to not accept the said SOP as it was prepared without taking into confidence the Bar, despite the assurance given to them by CJI Bobde in the meeting held on March 1st 2021.

In its plea, the Association insisted that hybrid hearing should have been for all days i.e. from Monday to Friday. However, in the impugned SOP, it said, "there is no provision for hybrid hearing for the matters listed on Monday and Friday, i.e. Miscellaneous days when primarily fresh matters are listed."

The plea also raises the issue of oral mentioning before the Supreme Court, a practice that was prevalent during pre-Covid days. It states,

"For around last one year this Hon'ble Court is working through virtual hearing and there is no provision for Oral mentioning in Standard Operating Procedure dated 05.03.2021 and as a result lawyers would still not be able to make Oral mentioning."

It stated that a large number of urgent matters are going unheard because of the peculiar system of listing, i.e. sending an email to the Mentioning Registrar giving the reasons for urgency.

The Association said that most of the High Courts, including the Delhi High Court, have either started holding Physical Courts or are in the process of starting Physical Courts; and it is high time that like every other institution, the Supreme Court also restores normalcy and begins physical hearings with adequate precautions like temperature check at entry points, wearing of masks and maintenance of social distancing.