Read Time: 06 minutes

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central Government, four High Courts, the Bar Council of India (BCI) and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on a writ petition seeking a declaration that the right to participate in court proceedings via video conference is a fundamental right.

The bench of Justice L Nageswara Rao, Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice B V Nagarathna was hearing the plea filed by an organization of lawyers called "All India Association of Jurists", and legal journalist Sparsh Upadhyay.

The High Courts whose responses have been sought include those at Uttarakhand, Bombay, Madhya Pradesh, and Kerala.

The plea was filed specifically challenging the Aug 16 notification issued by the Uttarakhand High Court to revert to full physical functioning from Aug 24 to the exclusion of virtual mode of hearing cases completely.

The plea also sought a direction restraining all High Courts from denying access to lawyers through the virtual mode of hearing on the ground of availability of the option of physical hearing.

Sr. Adv. Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the petitioners informed the court that the petitioner organization represents more than 5000 lawyers, to this the Court observed how BCI Chairman had already stated that virtual hearings were the reason why younger lawyers were suffering as their livelihood had been affected because of it.

Stating that during the physical hearing, there is eye-to-eye contact which makes the lawyer's arguments more effective, the court asked the petitioners’ counsel in the absence of such facility, how the young lawyers will learn.

On the contention raised by Sr. Adv. Luthra that some High Courts were saying that they would follow the hybrid mode of hearing but were effectively insisting on the physical appearance of lawyers, the bench made it clear that it would not be staying any notification without hearing the other side.

However, Luthra further contended that the hybrid option should not be done away with as it lets the litigants save a cost on the lawyers to travel & also reduces carbon footprints. It'll also be a relief for the litigants, he said.

Sr. Adv. Vikas Singh, the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association made it clear that they are against the petition and want only full physical hearing. He said that he will file an affidavit in that regard.

The plea filed through Advocate Sriram Parakkat and drawn by Advocates Siddharth R Gupta and Prerna Robin stated that Uttarakhand High Court’s concerned notification is a death knell for justice, because as observed by the E-Committee of Supreme Court, the very idea of virtual courts is an accessible, affordable justice in the country.

Thereafter, the court issued notice to the respondents stating that it will pass orders only after hearing the Bar Council of India and SCBA.

The matter is now expected to be heard after four weeks.

Case Title: All India Association of Jurists and another v. High Court of Uttarakhand and others