Delhi HC Expresses Concern Over Lack Of Infrastructure For Hybrid Hearings In District Courts, Restores PIL Seeking Implementation

A Division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna allowed an application filed for restoration of the petition, which the Court had disposed of in January 2022, on the ground that no effective steps are being taken by the Delhi government for providing requisite infrastructure for hybrid hearings.

The bench said some of the judges in district courts were holding hybrid hearings using mobile phones of the court staff.

"What is happening right now is that judges are holding hearings on mobile phones. They are taking their court staff's mobile phone and connecting hybrid hearing through it. They (petitioners) have pointed out a very important thing and we need to look into it," Justice Manmohan said.

The bench asked officials of the High Court to visit the courtroom of the District Judge in Tis Hazari court premises where a set-up has been created for hybrid hearings.

"The district judge's room has been done quite well and it needs to be replicated in all other courts. Take it as a model and get it replicated in other courts. If you can get it done by March 31, 2024, it would be great," it said.

As the application for restoration of the plea was not opposed by the counsel for the Delhi High Court on the administrative side and the Delhi government, the Court allowed it, terming it an important issue.

Central Project Coordinator Abhilash Malhotra informed the bench that the Public Works Department (PWD) had submitted a project report on hybrid hearing which was examined by the National Informatics Centre (NIC) at the request of the high court registrar general's office.

In August, the NIC requested the PWD to submit the report after getting approval from the Information Technology Department of the Delhi government. However, no progress has taken place since and the PWD was delaying the project without any reason, he submitted.

The bench asked the Delhi government to take necessary steps and revert to it with further developments.

The counsel for the High Court administration also submitted there was a lack of infrastructure since the Delhi government has not approved funds required for the project.

The bench asked the High Court's Counsel to file an updated status report before January 11, the next date of hearing.

Petitioner Anil Kumar Hajelay and others had approached the high court in 2021 with a plea seeking direction to the authorities to ensure the required infrastructure facilities are put in place for holding hybrid hearings in district courts and quasi-judicial bodies, including tribunals.

The plea was disposed of in January 2022 after the Court was informed that the government was in the process of procuring equipment to facilitate hybrid hearings.

However, the petitioners filed an application claiming many fora are yet to get the facilities for hybrid hearing, while others have closed the option altogether.

"The respondent no. 1 (Delhi High Court administration) vide office order dated June 5, 2023 modified the rule of hybrid hearings in the district courts by waiving the earlier requirement of making an advance written request for the same. However, the infrastructural lacunae are creating a big hindrance in the successful implementation of the hybrid system of hearings," the application said.

It said during the pendency of the petition, the speed and inclination with which the Delhi government was working towards procuring and making ready for use the hardware and software systems required for hybrid hearings in the district courts and quasi-judicial bodies, was somewhat decent.

"But ever since this writ petition was disposed of, the pace of the implementation of the infrastructure required for the hybrid hearings has reduced considerably. In fact, there is almost negligible development ever since the time when the status report was lastly filed on April 22, 2022 by the respondent no. 2 (Delhi government) and the petitioner has serious apprehensions that if this court does not resume the supervision of the implementation of the said system, then no further effective steps will be taken by the respondent no. 2 for providing the requisite infrastructure," the application said.

With PTI Inputs