<p>The Supreme Court has been moved to expedite the introduction of live streaming of court proceedings, in the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic in a plea filed by <strong>KN Govindacharya</strong>.</p>.<p>Referring to the decision of the top Court to <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/breaking-coronavirus-supreme-court-notifies-six-division-benches-that-will-sit-on-monday-march-16" rel="nofollow">restrict its functioning</a> as a precautionary measure to guard against the spread of the virus, the application highlights,</p>.<div><blockquote>“… the drastic measures taken in view of COVID-19 which affect the working of the Hon’ble Court would not have been required had the Hon’ble Supreme Court been live streaming its proceedings. It would have saved country-wide travel of litigants and further protected them from COVID-10.”</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>Further it is submitted that,</p>.<div><blockquote>“… the COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to embrace technology in the justice system… this Hon’ble Court by mandating live-streaming can usher in a new era."</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>The application filed through Advocate <strong>Sachin Mittal</strong> and drawn by Advocate <strong>Gaurav Pathak </strong>further argues that the Supreme Court has been lax in implementing its own decision to allow the live-streaming of proceedings by way of its 2018 verdict in in <em><a href="https://barandbench.com/live-streaming-judgment-supreme-court/">Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change v. Secretary General</a>.</em></p>.<p>Whereas Govindacharya had raised the issue during the course of the Ayodhya case, he points out that his plea has not been heard since <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/ayodhya-sc-seeks-response-from-registry-in-plea-for-live-streaming-of-proceedings" rel="nofollow">September last year</a>. </p>.<p>In this backdrop, he argues that, “<em>The Court’s action of not proceeding with live streaming, which is necessary for judicial reforms, does not enhance the confidence of the general public in the judiciary." </em></p>.<div><blockquote>"In the last few years, controversies have arisen in a number of matters before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which could have been avoided if live streaming was present.”</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>He goes on to submit that the introduction of live-streaming would ameliorate the issue of overcrowding in the Court, at relatively minimal costs when compared to the expenses incurred for the construction of new buildings to accommodate the crowd.</p>.<div><blockquote>“Adopting live streaming / recording / transcription in comparison will cost peanuts, and has the potential of solving the problems of crowd management within the existing building infrastructure.”</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>He adds that, <em>“the aspect of crowd management is of vital importance as it also relates to public health. Recently, six judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has released a notification regarding restrictions on functioning of Court due to COVID-10 pandemic. Thus, <strong>it is clear that the Judges, Advocates and Litigants are at a great risk of communicable diseases due to their increased public interaction.</strong></em>”</p>.<p>While this is the case, he argues that the Court cannot put its functioning on hold because of these issues given the huge toll that would take on case pendency. </p>.<p>Rather, it is pointed out that the dispensation of justice has to continue, even in the midst of public health emergency, which can last for months. With a view to solve this crisis, Govindacharya has now urged to Court to hear his plea for live-streaming court proceedings at the earliest.</p>.<p>Additionally, he also notes that it is time that the Court notify a mechanism for mentioning and listing cases, given his plea has not been heard since September 2019 despite it being mentioned several times before the Registry.</p>.<p>On a related note, it was <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/virtual-courtrooms-e-filing-paperless-courts-to-be-launched-soon" rel="nofollow">hinted yesterday</a> that the Supreme Court was on the verge of commencing <em>virtual courts</em> following a meeting held to discuss how the Court would work around the coronavirus outbreak. </p>.<p><strong>Justice DY Chandrachud,</strong> who is the Chairman of the e-committee, had assured, <em>inter alia</em>, that ‘people to people’ contact will be reduced by introducing court proceedings<em> via</em> video conference and that separate rooms for the counsel for each party will be made available.</p>.<p>Smart televisions may be installed in the press lounge for the convenience of the journalists and e-filings can be done at any time of the day, it was informed. The court proceedings and filing procedures will soon go digital and paperless, it was further stated.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court has been moved to expedite the introduction of live streaming of court proceedings, in the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic in a plea filed by <strong>KN Govindacharya</strong>.</p>.<p>Referring to the decision of the top Court to <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/breaking-coronavirus-supreme-court-notifies-six-division-benches-that-will-sit-on-monday-march-16" rel="nofollow">restrict its functioning</a> as a precautionary measure to guard against the spread of the virus, the application highlights,</p>.<div><blockquote>“… the drastic measures taken in view of COVID-19 which affect the working of the Hon’ble Court would not have been required had the Hon’ble Supreme Court been live streaming its proceedings. It would have saved country-wide travel of litigants and further protected them from COVID-10.”</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>Further it is submitted that,</p>.<div><blockquote>“… the COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to embrace technology in the justice system… this Hon’ble Court by mandating live-streaming can usher in a new era."</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>The application filed through Advocate <strong>Sachin Mittal</strong> and drawn by Advocate <strong>Gaurav Pathak </strong>further argues that the Supreme Court has been lax in implementing its own decision to allow the live-streaming of proceedings by way of its 2018 verdict in in <em><a href="https://barandbench.com/live-streaming-judgment-supreme-court/">Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change v. Secretary General</a>.</em></p>.<p>Whereas Govindacharya had raised the issue during the course of the Ayodhya case, he points out that his plea has not been heard since <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/ayodhya-sc-seeks-response-from-registry-in-plea-for-live-streaming-of-proceedings" rel="nofollow">September last year</a>. </p>.<p>In this backdrop, he argues that, “<em>The Court’s action of not proceeding with live streaming, which is necessary for judicial reforms, does not enhance the confidence of the general public in the judiciary." </em></p>.<div><blockquote>"In the last few years, controversies have arisen in a number of matters before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which could have been avoided if live streaming was present.”</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>He goes on to submit that the introduction of live-streaming would ameliorate the issue of overcrowding in the Court, at relatively minimal costs when compared to the expenses incurred for the construction of new buildings to accommodate the crowd.</p>.<div><blockquote>“Adopting live streaming / recording / transcription in comparison will cost peanuts, and has the potential of solving the problems of crowd management within the existing building infrastructure.”</blockquote><span class="attribution">KN Govindacharya</span></div>.<p>He adds that, <em>“the aspect of crowd management is of vital importance as it also relates to public health. Recently, six judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has released a notification regarding restrictions on functioning of Court due to COVID-10 pandemic. Thus, <strong>it is clear that the Judges, Advocates and Litigants are at a great risk of communicable diseases due to their increased public interaction.</strong></em>”</p>.<p>While this is the case, he argues that the Court cannot put its functioning on hold because of these issues given the huge toll that would take on case pendency. </p>.<p>Rather, it is pointed out that the dispensation of justice has to continue, even in the midst of public health emergency, which can last for months. With a view to solve this crisis, Govindacharya has now urged to Court to hear his plea for live-streaming court proceedings at the earliest.</p>.<p>Additionally, he also notes that it is time that the Court notify a mechanism for mentioning and listing cases, given his plea has not been heard since September 2019 despite it being mentioned several times before the Registry.</p>.<p>On a related note, it was <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/virtual-courtrooms-e-filing-paperless-courts-to-be-launched-soon" rel="nofollow">hinted yesterday</a> that the Supreme Court was on the verge of commencing <em>virtual courts</em> following a meeting held to discuss how the Court would work around the coronavirus outbreak. </p>.<p><strong>Justice DY Chandrachud,</strong> who is the Chairman of the e-committee, had assured, <em>inter alia</em>, that ‘people to people’ contact will be reduced by introducing court proceedings<em> via</em> video conference and that separate rooms for the counsel for each party will be made available.</p>.<p>Smart televisions may be installed in the press lounge for the convenience of the journalists and e-filings can be done at any time of the day, it was informed. The court proceedings and filing procedures will soon go digital and paperless, it was further stated.</p>