The Supreme Court of India on Friday rejected a plea requesting the introduction of virtual hearing facilities and the creation of evening courts across all district courts in the country. The petition, which aimed to improve access to justice through digital means, was dismissed by the Court, citing the complexity and diversity of the nation’s judicial landscape.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra ruled that such a sweeping directive is impractical. “The country is too large and complex to lay down such directions. These issues are being addressed in Phase 3 of the e-Courts project, which is part of an ongoing technological revolution. There cannot be judicial directions on this matter,” the Court observed.
The Bench emphasized that uniform guidelines could not be issued for a nation with such varied legal and logistical challenges. It further stated that the High Courts should be trusted to determine how best to utilize the funds allocated for technological upgrades, considering the unique needs and challenges faced by each state.
Addressing the petitioner’s argument that virtual hearing facilities would help present evidence and witnesses more effectively, the Court reiterated that not every demand could be met through public interest litigation. “High Courts have robust ICT committees, and we need to trust them,” CJI Chandrachud remarked. He highlighted the varying difficulties faced by different High Courts, such as the Meghalaya High Court’s vendor issues, which differ significantly from the challenges faced by the Bombay High Court.
The plea also sought the establishment of evening courts to handle the growing caseload, but the Bench dismissed this request, stating that it would likely be opposed by lawyers already burdened with long working hours. “The lawyers will oppose such a move. After their regular day’s work, they cannot be expected to argue in evening courts,” the CJI noted.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court declined to issue any directions mandating virtual hearings or evening courts, reinforcing the autonomy of High Courts to manage their affairs based on specific local needs and circumstances.
The petitioner, represented by Advocate Kishan Chand Jain, saw his plea dismissed, as the Court underscored the need for a tailored approach rather than a broad, one-size-fits-all mandate for judicial reforms.
