Five years after the Supreme Court in a landmark judgment underscored the significance of live streaming court proceedings and termed it an extension of the principle of ‘open justice’ and ‘open courts’, only nine out of the 25 High Courts in the country have opened their virtual doors to the public. In the Supreme Court itself, live streaming is limited to only Constitutional cases.
The apex court had said the need for live streaming applies with equal and, in some respects, greater force to proceedings of cases in district courts and High Courts, as most citizens approach them for justice. Members of the public are allowed to witness hearings in court, but they often face constraints of time and resources and an inability to travel long distances.
During a recent hearing on same-sex marriage pleas, Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud had observed: “The live streaming of court proceedings has really taken our court absolutely to the homes and to the hearts of the common citizens, and I think that is part of the process.”
Adequate infrastructure
After the outbreak of COVID-19 and imposition of lockdown, videoconferencing emerged as the mainstay of courts as holding physical hearings was not possible.
CJI Chandrachud recently appealed to the Chief Justices of High Courts not to disband the infrastructure put in place to enable videoconferencing during the lockdown. “It was not confined to the pandemic. It was for COVID and beyond,” the CJI said at a national conference on digitisation, paperless courts and e-initiatives.
According to data from the Ministry of Law and Justice, district courts used videoconferencing to hear 1,90,54,623 cases, from the beginning of the lockdown till March 31 this year; in the case of High Courts, it was 78,39,650 cases.
Early adopters
The Gujarat High Court took the lead in October 2020 by live streaming court proceedings on YouTube on an experimental basis. Its official YouTube channel has garnered 1.24 lakh subscribers and 1.9 crore views for its over 8,600 videos.
A few other High Courts followed in its footsteps with varying degrees of success. The High Court of Karnataka’s YouTube channel has 1.10 lakh subscribers and 8.6 lakh views. Within six months of beginning live streaming, the High Court of Meghalaya’s YouTube channel has secured 1,820 subscribers and 82,229 views.
Restrictions
The Model Rules for Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings state that cases concerning matrimonial matters, child adoption and child custody, sexual offences, child sexual abuse, and juveniles in conflict with the law should be excluded from live streaming.
This January, the Delhi High Court notified the rules for live streaming of its proceedings and that of all subordinate courts in the national capital. It also mentioned several restrictions, including a blanket ban on reproducing, transmitting, uploading or posting audiovisual recordings in any form.
Though the Delhi High Court has heard 3.17 lakh cases through videoconferencing till March 31, it has not started live streaming of its proceedings.
‘Right to open justice’
In a recent letter, Aditya Kashyap, an advocate enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi, requested the CJI to consider live streaming the proceedings in all courtrooms of the Supreme Court and to make an “appropriate intervention” to speed up its implementation in the remaining High Courts and district courts.
Mr. Kashyap said that it would have a significant impact on the lives of litigants, lawyers, law students, and the public, and “effectuate the right to open justice and public trial”.
“Live streaming would even help litigants from far-flung regions to follow the proceedings in their case without physically coming to the courtroom, thus bringing in transparency and access to justice,” the letter said.
