Landmark Judgments On Trial By Video Conferencing
1. Girish Ramachandra Deshpande v. CBI (2018)
Facts:
The petitioner challenged the use of video conferencing for recording his statement during investigation, claiming it violated the right to a fair trial.
Issue:
Is recording statements via video conferencing legally valid and does it infringe the right to a fair trial?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court held that video conferencing is a valid mode for recording statements and conducting proceedings, especially when physical presence is not possible. However, it must ensure the accused’s rights to participate effectively and cross-examine witnesses.
Significance:
This case endorsed video conferencing as a legitimate tool in criminal proceedings, provided procedural safeguards are maintained to protect fair trial rights.
2. In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (2020) (COVID-19 Case)
Facts:
Due to COVID-19 lockdowns, courts were closed, and trials could not proceed physically. The Supreme Court considered the use of video conferencing to continue court proceedings.
Issue:
Can video conferencing replace physical court hearings during emergencies without compromising justice?
Ruling:
The Court held that video conferencing and virtual hearings are essential and permissible during emergencies to ensure the justice delivery system is not paralyzed. It emphasized maintaining confidentiality, privacy, and fairness.
Significance:
This judgment paved the way for wide adoption of video conferencing in courts during the pandemic, legitimizing its use beyond physical hearings.
3. State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti (2004)
Facts:
The accused in a criminal case was examined via video conferencing from a different location.
Issue:
Is recording examination or cross-examination through video conferencing permissible in criminal trials?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled that examination of witnesses and accused through video conferencing is permissible, but courts must ensure that the accused’s rights are protected, and that the technology does not cause prejudice.
Significance:
This judgment supported the use of video conferencing for examination and cross-examination, enabling remote participation without hampering justice.
4. In Re: Suo Moto Writ Petition (Court Functioning during Lockdown) (2020)
Facts:
With courts functioning partially during lockdown, the Supreme Court suggested video conferencing for ongoing trials.
Issue:
How can courts balance the need for access to justice with pandemic restrictions?
Ruling:
The Court encouraged courts to maximize the use of video conferencing, issued guidelines for its use, and stressed on technical infrastructure and training for judicial officers.
Significance:
This case institutionalized video conferencing as a permanent and effective mode of court functioning, especially in exceptional circumstances.
5. Union of India v. Harjeet Singh (2021)
Facts:
The appellant challenged conviction based on statements recorded via video conferencing, alleging procedural irregularities.
Issue:
Can convictions be upheld if key evidence is recorded through video conferencing?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court held that if video conferencing proceedings adhere to procedural safeguards and the accused is given opportunity to contest, evidence so recorded is valid. Courts must ensure no compromise on fairness.
Significance:
This ruling affirmed that convictions based on video conference evidence are legally sustainable if fairness and due process are maintained.
Summary:
Video conferencing is a valid and legally recognized mode of recording statements, examinations, and conducting trials (Girish Deshpande, Suhas Katti).
It is especially crucial during emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure uninterrupted justice delivery (Limitation Extension Case, Suo Moto Writ).
Courts must ensure procedural safeguards, confidentiality, and effective participation to uphold fair trial rights.
Evidence recorded via video conferencing is admissible and can support convictions if fair trial standards are met (Harjeet Singh).
The judiciary actively promotes video conferencing as a tool for modernization and accessibility in the justice system.
RELATED Blog
0 comments