Read Time: 07 minutes

The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Executive Committee of the Delhi High Court Bar Association ("DHBCA") to hold a meeting on 1st March 2021 at 4:00 PM to discuss the issue of hybrid hearing & constitute a Committee to interact with various stakeholders to submit recommendations to the Executive Committee. 

In the present matter, the petitioner has filed a petition to seek twofold relief. Firstly, to devise a mechanism for vaccination of lawyers enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi ("BCD") & who are members of DHBCA. Secondly, to suspend the impugned notification dated 20th February 2021 related to the Delhi High Court & Subordinate Court's physical functioning until completion of the vaccination process. 

The Counsel for the petitioner made the following submissions concerning open hybrid hearing & not only in exceptional cases: 
    • Since the time the said decision was taken, there has been a resurgence of CoVID 19 in at least 8 to 10 States in the country & thus, there is a need to reconsider the same 
    • There are public reports that there is a new strain of COVID-19 in India, and there is a risk involving greater exposure.
    • Several lawyers are unable to attend the physical courts due to their age & comorbidities & request for a hybrid hearing in exceptional circumstances may place a risk upon such lawyers 
    • Several young lawyers who, irrespective of not falling into the categories of being above 60 years or above 45 years with comorbidities have senior citizens like parents and grandparents at their homes, including young children, who may get exposed if they continue to appear physically in Courts.
    • Adhering to social distancing is almost impossible due to the distance between courtrooms and the corridors/common areas used in the Subordinate Courts and the High Court.
    • Even after administration of the first dose of vaccine, as per the scientific literature, it could take at least 8 weeks for the development of antibodies & even during that period, there could be exposure to CoVID 19 strain 
    • Until schools are open fully, the option of appearing through video conferencing ought to be available, especially for women

While noting that the matter of vaccination is pending before the Supreme Court in Arvind Singh v. Union of India & Anr W.P.(C) 84/2021, the Single Bench of Justice Pratibha M Singh directed the Ld Counsels to seek instructions from the Ministry of Health as to whether the Bar Association could be given no objection to arrange for facilities by entering into an arrangement with the manufacturers to make it possible for the lawyers falling in the category of above 60 years & above 45 years with comorbidities to be vaccinated, upon payment of the prescribed charges. 

The Court, with regards to the resumption of physical hearings from 15th March 2021, observed that as per the notification dated 20th February 2021, the notification made it clear that although the Courts would be opening physically but in exceptional cases, the parties or their counsels would be permitted to join the proceedings through video conferencing subject to availability of requisite infrastructure.

Further, a petition was also filed in the Court on behalf of various Counsels with respect to adverse orders being passed in the District Courts such as issuing non-bailable warrants, defendants being proceeded ex-parte, closure of evidence, etc. upon the non-physical appearance of Counsel. The Bench, in this regard, has directed the subordinate courts not to pass adverse orders if the counsel does not appear in physical hearing for any justifiable cause. 

The matters are now listed for 4th March 2021. 

Case Title: Manashwy Jha V. Union Of India & Ors