Inadequate Explanation Under Section 313 CrPC Cannot Be Foundation For Conviction If Prosecution Fails To Prove Case: Allahabad High Court No-Confidence Motion In Housing Societies Fails If 2/3 Majority Not Met; Fractions In Voting Threshold Cannot Be Rounded Down: Bombay High Court Successor Rent Controller Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Act As Appellate Court Under Review Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Restores Eviction Order Article 21 Overrides PMLA Section 45 Rigors In Cases Of Unduly Long Incarceration Without Trial: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail To SSC Scam ‘Middleman’ Unregistered Family Partition Deed Recording Past Oral Arrangement Doesn't Require Compulsory Registration: Gujarat High Court Private Banks Acting As Authorised Dealers Under FEMA Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction; Can Refuse Transactions For 'Sanctions-Related' Concerns: Gauhati High Court Non-Examination Of Investigating Officer Not Fatal To Prosecution Case If Eyewitness Testimony Is Credible & Trustworthy: Jharkhand High Court Mere Denial Of Signature Insufficient When Execution Is Proved Through Endorsements: Karnataka High Court Restores Specific Performance Decree Sectarianism Claims Can't Discredit Reliable Testimony Of Child Sexual Abuse Victim: Kerala High Court Upholds Madrassa Teacher's Conviction State Must Prove Specific 'Public Interest' To Exempt Projects From Social Impact Assessment Under Section 10A Land Acquisition Act: Telangana High Court Or 2 Rule 2 CPC |Failure To Seek Specific Performance In Earlier Injunction Suit Bars Subsequent Claim; Readiness & Willingness Must Be Continuous: Madras High Court Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Does Not Result In Automatic Discharge In Criminal Case: Orissa High Court History Sheet Can Be Opened On 'Reasonable Belief' Even Without Conviction, But Must Be Reviewed After 7 Years Of Good Conduct: Rajasthan High Court

Supreme Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines for Enhanced Security and Digitization of Judicial Infrastructure

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta, has addressed pressing concerns regarding security breaches within court premises and the urgent need for technological advancements in the judicial system. The court’s observations shed light on the critical nature of these issues and their far-reaching consequences.

The court’s observations highlighted the urgency of the situation, with Justice S. Ravindra Bhat stating, “Would not hope for the litigants who visit the temples of justice dwindle, if the very halls of justice lack the shield of security? How can the litigants secure justice for them when those entrusted to render justice are themselves insecure?” The court emphasized that recent incidents of gunfire within court premises have exposed vulnerabilities that jeopardize the safety of judges, lawyers, court staff, litigants, and the general public.

Acknowledging the tragic incident involving an Additional Sessions Judge, the court expressed concerns about the personal safety of judges. Justice Dipankar Datta noted, “Lives of judges, off the court, of late are also not entirely safe and secure.” The court stressed the importance of implementing comprehensive security protocols to preserve the sanctity of the judicial process.

Addressing the pending contempt petition related to the violation of court orders on the installation of CCTV cameras, the court highlighted two crucial issues. The installation of security measures within court premises and the introduction of audio-visual recording during trials were identified as vital steps toward enhancing the safety and transparency of the justice delivery system.

The court’s guidelines include recommendations for the establishment of security plans, permanent Court Security Units, meticulous CCTV camera installation, modern security equipment, and comprehensive digitization of judicial infrastructure. The court emphasized that immediate measures should be undertaken alongside long-term solutions to ensure the safety of all stakeholders and to maintain faith in the judicial system.

The Supreme Court’s ruling underscores the significance of these issues and urges the prioritization of these measures. It has directed High Courts to provide monthly reports on the implementation status of the guidelines. The court’s proactive approach aims to enhance access to justice, prevent untoward incidents, and fortify the safety and security of the judicial ecosystem.

The court’s comprehensive judgement is a step forward in ensuring the safety and integrity of the judicial process, with the next hearing scheduled for October 12, 2023.

Date of Decision: 11th August, 2023

PRADYUMAN BISHT vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS    

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/11-Aug-2023_Pardyuman_Vs_UOI.pdf"]

Latest Legal News