In a significant inquiry into the use of technology in legal proceedings, the Supreme Court has directed the Maharashtra Home Secretary to explain the lack of video conferencing facilities for presenting accused persons in court. The directive comes amid concerns that such shortcomings could undermine the judicial process.
A bench comprising Justices Rajesh Bindal and R Mahadevan has mandated the submission of an affidavit by the secretary within a fortnight, seeking detailed explanations on multiple fronts. The justices are inquiring whether video conferencing tools are available in Maharashtra for recording evidence and for other legal proceedings involving the accused.
The order specifies, “Let the Secretary, Home Department, State of Maharashtra file an affidavit as to why video conferencing facilities are not being used for the production of the accused in court for the purpose of recording of evidence or otherwise.”
Further, the affidavit must disclose whether the necessary infrastructure for video conferencing exists in the state’s courts and jails. It should also provide a breakdown of the financial expenditure allocated for the installation of such facilities, including the amount released and the current status of this technology in judicial and correctional establishments.
This judicial intervention was prompted by a plea from an accused whose trial was reportedly delayed and adjourned 30 times due to the non-production in court. During the hearing, the state’s counsel failed to justify the absence of the accused, leading to the Supreme Court’s stern request for a detailed explanation.
