Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

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