Bhaskar Dev Konwar
(The writer is a senior advocate, Gauhati High Court.
He can be reached at bhaskarvedkonwar@gmail.com)
Post-pandemic, the courts have opened for physical hearing, still, the lawyers/litigants in India have the option of physical hearing or virtual facility, which is referred to as the hybrid model. Video links are shared on the website of courts and through messages for online hearings. Earlier, a lawyer practising in the remote corners of India like North East India had to spend nearly three days going and appearing before the Supreme Court of India at Delhi, which was also the same if the litigation is interstate, etc.
Many women lawyers have written to the Supreme Court to continue with the digital platform which is a boon for them. Earlier, they were struggling to balance their role as principal caregivers in the family, with the demands of the profession. A young group of lawyers also requested the CJI to continue the system of virtual/hybrid hearing of cases as it has advantages in terms of accessibility to the Supreme Court from distant places and increased transparency. The litigants and others can also watch the proceedings of the court from their homes and offices.
Access to justice is firmly rooted in the Indian legal system. Article 21 of the Constitution encompasses the right to a speedy trial, right of a fair trial, right against delayed adjudication, right to legal aid, right of appeal, etc. By adopting the virtual mode of hearing, many of the bottlenecks in enforcing the aforesaid ideals can be fast-tracked, which has already been tested by extensive use of computers and digital technology.
Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961 guarantees a statutory right to an advocate to appear before all the courts in India. However, in practice, it is difficult for an advocate to manage time and appear in different courts of the country. Virtual courts, which is different from live streaming, has provided the solution to the advocates to practice in different courts in India without wasting time on travelling and unnecessarily burdening the litigants with additional costs. The hybrid system should continue as it takes justice closer to the people.
Making hybrid hearings permanent will enable faster disposal of the case in a judicial system, which is already over-burdened with huge backlog/pendency of cases. Digital slots can be given to the lawyers to initiate and complete their arguments within a fixed timeframe, with the option of submitting written arguments. Overcrowding in the courtrooms and traffic congestion around the courts can be avoided with the adoption of a hybrid model of hearing.
The future of litigation is paperless and alternative dispute redressal mechanisms may be widely adopted. To make the hybrid mode more effective, the state should immediately increase its budgetary allocation for spending on computer hardware, audio-visual equipment and other peripherals to remove any technical glitch. With time, all the stakeholders in the judicial process are likely to become comfortable with the adoption of the hybrid mode of functioning of the courts.