Allahabad High Court warns of action against judicial officers who do not allow use of video conference

The Allahabad High Court recently said that courts in Uttar Pradesh cannot be permitted to sleep over the matter of utilisation of video conference facilities [Smt Anju Madhusoodanan Pillai vs State Of UP]..The Court warned of action against judicial officers found not allowing use of video conference facility despite availability of infrastructure. Justice Vikram D Chauhan sought reports from the High Court’s Central Project Coordinator and the District Judge of Ghaziabad after the Court was told there was no facility of video conferencing available in a Magistrate's courtroom in Ghaziabad. .The Court further asked the District Judge of Ghaziabad district to apprise about the number of courts which have the video conference facility and how many of them have recorded evidence virtually in the last two months. “In the event, courts are not recording evidence where the prosecution witnesses are outside the district, the District Judge, Ghaziabad shall also explain as to why the officers of judiciary of District Ghaziabad are not taking interest in implementation of Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 and why action be not initiated for not following the direction of law,” said the Court. .The Court said the Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh were made in 2020 and sufficient time was granted to raise the infrastructure.“The courts cannot be permitted to sleep over the matter in respect of video conferencing facility,” it added.The Court further remarked the video conferencing infrastructure has been established by public money and has to be best utilised. .Meanwhile, the Court also asked the government counsel to seek instructions from the State law secretary with regarding to video conference facilities not being extended to the prosecution's witnesses, who are outside the district where the case is going on.“The Principal Secretary (Law), Uttar Pradesh shall also explain as to what steps have been taken by the Government in this respect so that movement of prosecution witnesses from one district to another, who are generally government officials is saved and valuable time of government officers are not spend in travelling to other district for appearance before the court,” it ordered..The issues arose before the High Court in a petition seeking directions to the trial court to take evidence through video conferencing in a criminal case.After the Court was told that no video conference facility was available in the Ghaziabad court, the Court directed the trial judge to take a decision on the application moved by the prosecution witnesses for leading evidence through the online medium..The Court will hear the matter next on April 9.Advocate Vijit Saxena represented the petitioner.Advocate Ramesh Kumar Pandey represented a respondent.[Read Order]