IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION  

SUO MOTU WRIT (CIVIL) NO.5/2020

IN RE: GUIDELINES FOR COURT FUNCTIONING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC

O R D E R

1. The recent outbreak of COVID-19 (Coronavirus) in

several countries, including India, has necessitated the

immediate  adoption  of  measures  to  ensure  social

distancing in order to prevent the transmission of the

virus. The Supreme Court of India and High Courts have

adopted  measures  to  reduce  the  physical  presence  of

lawyers, litigants, court staff, para legal personnel

and representatives of the electronic and print media in

courts across the country and to ensure  the continued

dispensation of justice.  

2. Every  individual  and  institution  is  expected  to

cooperate in the implementation of measures designed to

reduce the transmission of the virus. The scaling down

of  conventional  operations  within  the  precincts  of

courts is a measure in that direction. Access to justice

1

is  fundamental  to  preserve  the  rule  of  law  in  the

democracy envisaged by the Constitution of India. The

challenges occasioned by the outbreak of COVID-19 have

to  be  addressed  while  preserving  the  constitutional

commitment to ensuring the delivery of and access to

justice to those who seek it. It is necessary to ensure

compliance with social distancing guidelines issued from

time to time by various health authorities, Government

of India and States. Court hearings in congregation must

necessarily become an exception during this period.

3. Modern technology has enabled courts to enhance the

quality  and  effectiveness  of  the  administration  of

justice.  Technology has facilitated advances in speed,

accessibility  and  connectivity  which  enable  the

dispensation  of  justice  to  take  place  in  diverse

settings and situations without compromising the core

legal principles of adjudication.  Indian courts have

been proactive in embracing advancement in technology in

judicial  proceedings.  The  Indian  judiciary  has

incorporated  Information  and  Communication  Technology

systems  through  the  e-Courts  Integrated  Mission  Mode

Project (e-Courts Project) as part of the National e-

Governance  Plan  (NeGP).  The  robust  infrastructure  in

2

place  has  reduced  conventional  impediments  and  legal

uncertainty surrounding the use of virtual courts. ICT

enabled infrastructure is available across all courts

including the district judiciary which constitutes the

initial interface of the court system with the citizen.

4. The use of technology found judicial recognition in

precedent of this Court in State of Maharashtra v Praful

Desai1.   This  Court  held  that  the  term  ‘evidence’

includes electronic evidence and that video conferencing

may  be  used  to  record  evidence.  It  observed  that

developments  in  technology  have  opened  up  the

possibility  of  virtual  courts  which  are  similar  to

physical courts. The Court held:

“Advances  in  science  and  technology  have now, so to say, shrunk the world. They now enable one to see and hear events, taking place far away, as they are actually taking place…Video conferencing is an advancement in science and technology which permits one to see, hear and talk with someone far away, with the same facility and ease as if he is present before you i.e. in your presence… In fact  he/she  is  present  before  you  on  a screen.  Except  for  touching  one  can  see, hear and observe as if the party is in the same  room.  In  video  conferencing  both parties  are  in  presence  of  each  other… Recording of such evidence would be as per “procedure established by law”.”

1 (2003) 4 SCC 601

3

5. Faced  with  the  unprecedented  and  extraordinary

outbreak of a pandemic, it is necessary that Courts at

all levels respond to the call of social distancing and

ensure  that  court  premises  do  not  contribute  to  the

spread of virus.  This is not a matter of discretion but

of  duty.   Indeed,  Courts  throughout  the  country

particularly at the level of the Supreme Court and the

High  Courts  have  employed  video  conferencing  for

dispensation  of  Justice  and  as  guardians  of  the

Constitution  and  as  protectors  of  individual  liberty

governed by the rule of law. Taking cognizance of the

measures adopted by this court and by the High Courts

and District Courts, it is necessary for this court to

issue directions by taking recourse to the jurisdiction

conferred by Article 142 of the Constitution.

6. Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred on

the  Supreme  Court  of  India  by  Article  142  of  the

Constitution  of  India  to  make  such  orders  as  are

necessary for doing complete justice, we direct that:

i. All measures that have been and shall be taken

by  this  Court  and  by  the  High  Courts,  to

reduce the need for the physical presence of

all stakeholders within court premises and to

4

secure the functioning of courts in consonance

with  social  distancing  guidelines  and  best

public health practices shall be deemed to be

lawful;

ii. The Supreme Court of India and all High Courts

are authorized to adopt measures required to

ensure the robust functioning of the judicial

system through the use of video conferencing

technologies; and

iii. Consistent  with  the  peculiarities  of  the

judicial  system  in  every  state  and  the

dynamically  developing  public  health

situation, every High Court is authorised to

determine the modalities which are suitable to

the temporary transition to the use of video

conferencing technologies;

iv. The concerned courts shall maintain a helpline

to ensure that any complaint in regard to the

quality  or  audibility  of  feed  shall  be

communicated  during  the  proceeding  or

immediately after its conclusion failing which

no  grievance  in  regard  to  it  shall  be

entertained thereafter.

v. The District Courts in each State shall adopt

the mode of Video Conferencing prescribed by

the concerned High Court.

vi. The Court shall duly notify and make available

the facilities for video conferencing for such

litigants who do not have the means or access

to  video  conferencing  facilities.   If

necessary,  in  appropriate  cases  courts  may

appoint  an  amicus-curiae  and  make  video

5

conferencing facilities available to such an

advocate.

vii. Until appropriate rules are framed by the High

Courts,  video  conferencing  shall  be  mainly

employed for hearing arguments whether at the

trial stage or at the appellate stage. In no

case shall evidence be recorded without the

mutual consent of both the parties by video

conferencing.  If  it  is  necessary  to  record

evidence in a Court room the presiding officer

shall  ensure  that  appropriate  distance  is

maintained between any two individuals in the

Court.

    viii. The presiding officer shall have the power to

restrict entry of persons into the court room

or  the points  from which  the arguments  are

addressed  by  the  advocates.  No  presiding

officer shall prevent the entry of a party to

the case unless such party is suffering from

any infectious illness.  However, where the

number  of  litigants  are  many  the  presiding

officer shall have the power to restrict the

numbers. The presiding officer shall in his

discretion adjourn the proceedings where it is

not possible to restrict the number.

7.  The above directions are issued in furtherance of

the  commitment  to  the  delivery  of  justice.  The

cooperation of all courts, judges, litigants, parties,

staff  and other  stakeholders is  indispensable in  the

6

successful  implementation  of  the  above  directions  to

ensure  that  the  judiciary  rises  to  face  the  unique

challenge presented by the outbreak of COVID-19.  These

directions shall operate until further orders.

8. List the matter after four weeks.  

……………………………………………CJI [ S.A.BOBDE ]

………………………………………………J. [ D.Y. CHANDRACHUD ]

……………………………………………J. [ L. NAGESWARA RAO ]

NEW DELHI; APRIL 06, 2020.

7