PIL challenges Punjab and Haryana High Court decision to stop uploading of court orders in sensitive cases

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition has been filed before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the administrative orders passed by the High Court against uploading orders and judgments in sensitive cases on the court websites, including the e-court platform [Rohit Mehta vs Punjab and Haryana High Court and Others]..The cases in which orders and judgments are not being uploaded for public downloading relate to sexual offences, matrimonial disputes and those involving juveniles.The PIL moved by advocate Rohit Mehta also challenges Section 73 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 366(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which impose a blanket prohibition on publication of anything relating to cases involving sexual offences, without a court's permission.The petition is listed for hearing before a division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetarpal on Friday. .Section 73 of the BNS states that whoever prints or publishes any matter in relation to any proceeding before a court with respect to sexual offences - as referred to in section 72, without the previous permission of such Court, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.However, it also explains that the printing or publication of the judgment of any High Court or the Supreme Court does not amount to the offence.Similarly, Section 366(3) of BNSS also states that it would be unlawful to print or publish any matter in relation to any such proceedings except with the previous permission of the Court..Interestingly, the PIL has also challenged the High Court Computer Committee’s order directing the National Informatics Centre (NIC) to create a mechanism to hide the names of parties in the matters - relating to Juvenile Justice Act, Official Secrets Act, intelligence agencies, domestic violence, sexual offences against women and children - in case search, cause list and other search options on the High Court website.In order to enable the lawyers appearing in such cases to download such judgments, the High Court has enabled a special section on its website but the same is not accessible to general public..Mehta has also challenged Section 22 of the Hindu Marriage Act and Section 33 of the Special Marriage Act to the extent that they prohibit publishing of judgments in matrimonial disputes, even with party details hidden..It has been contended that no deliberation was undertaken with regard to the public’s right to access courts before issuing such directions against uploading of orders and judgments.The PIL terms the executive orders issued by the High Court in this regard to be gag orders and argues that they are against the concept of open courts.Advocates Kshitiz Goel, Krishan Kanha and Nirmal Sharma are representing the petitioner.