Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

The Allahabad High Court has recently issued directions aimed at streamlining the process of gathering evidence in cases by minimizing the need for government officers to move across districts for recording testimonies. Court ordered a coordinated effort to be made by the State, Police Authorities and Director of Prosecution to utilize video conferencing technology for recording evidence.

"The endeavour of the court concerned should be to get the evidence of prosecution witnesses who are outside the jurisdiction of the court recorded through video conferencing," court asserted.

However, the court clarified that in specific cases, personal witness presence may be directed by the concerned court, if the same is required.

The bench of Vikram D. Chauhan emphasised that the infrastructure for Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 has been established from the State ex-chequer and is for the benefit of the prosecution witnesses and private parties who are parties to the litigation and who are residing outside the jurisdiction of the court.

"The government servants are also the beneficiaries of the aforesaid Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 when they are posted outside the district where the case is going on," court asserted.

Therefore, court directed that the Director General of Police shall take necessary steps in respect of recording of evidence through video conferencing in respect of the prosecution witnesses who are posted outside the district where the cases are going on and in this respect necessary orders shall be issued.

Furthermore, court ordered that the Senior Superintendent of Police and Superintendent of Police shall ensure that applications are filed before the court concerned for recording of evidence through video conferencing in respect of the witnesses/government servants who are posted outside the district where the cases are going on. The Director of Prosecution shall also take necessary steps in this respect, the bench directed. 

Previously, in the present matter, the high court had expressed grave concern over allegations of non-compliance with the Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020, particularly in the Ghaziabad district.

On March 28, the court had directed the District Judge, Ghaziabad to submit a report stating how many courts are enabled for video conferencing and how many courts are recording evidence through video conferencing in Gaziabad.

In response, the District Judge informed the court that the necessary video conferencing infrastructure is available in the relevant court and that instructions have been issued to judicial officers for the effective implementation of the Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020.

However, the report also highlighted an issue that the prosecution is not requesting for leading evidence by video conferencing

Additionally, court noted a report submitted by the Central Project Coordinator (CPC) indicating that video conferencing facilities have been set up in the District Court of Ghaziabad, as well as in all courts across the State of Uttar Pradesh. However, the data concerning the recording of evidence through video conferencing revealed a discrepancy: smaller districts have recorded more evidence through video conferencing compared to larger districts such as Ghaziabad.

The Ghaziabad is a district in the national capital region and is required to be more proactive in implementation of the Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020, the high court said. 

To this, Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General for the State of UP assured the court that the State is ready to extend all cooperation for recording of evidence through video conferencing and steps are being taken so that the Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 are implemented in letter and spirit.

Endeavour would be made by the officers and the Director General of Police to hold a meeting with the Commissioner of Police, Senior Superintendent of Police and Superintendent of Police in this respect so that the prosecution can move to the court concerned for recording of evidence through video conferencing in respect of the government servants who are posted outside the district where the case is going on, the AAG submitted before the court. 

The directions were passed in an application to quash an order of the district court in a dowry cruelty case. During the previous hearing in the matter, it was brought to the court's attention that the Magistrate Court of District Ghaziabad lacked video conferencing facilities. 

To this, the court had asserted the necessity of verifying the statement. Consequently, it had directed the Central Project Coordinator (CPC) of the High Court in Allahabad and the District Judge of Ghaziabad to submit a report in this respect by April 2, 2024.

The matter will now be next heard on April 18, 2024. 

Case Title: Smt Anju Madhusoodanan Pillai v. State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow And Another