Supreme Court disputes Calcutta HC’s physical presence mandate in matrimonial case, citing medical concerns and advocating technology integration.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Recently, The Supreme Court of India has challenged a decision by the Calcutta High Court that mandated the physical presence of two individuals embroiled in a matrimonial dispute. This move by the apex court emphasized its concern for the rights of litigants facing medical issues and the integration of modern technology in judicial processes.
A Vacation Bench, comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, reviewed an appeal against a Calcutta High Court order dated May 14. The High Court had previously ordered that the police ensure the appellants’ personal appearance to facilitate direct interaction concerning their marital discord. However, one of the appellants was scheduled for surgery, making travel from another state potentially harmful.
The Supreme Court criticized the High Court’s decision, highlighting the unnecessary hardship it imposed on the individuals, particularly the one with impending medical procedures.
“We have failed to grasp the reasoning behind the High Court’s instruction. It’s puzzling why, despite the advancements in science and technology and the provision of virtual hearing options in High Courts, the Court didn’t find it suitable to permit the two petitioners to attend virtually.”
-the apex court stated.
The Justices expressed their bafflement and concern over the insistence on physical appearances, suggesting that virtual proceedings could have been a more humane and technologically savvy approach.
“On the surface, the circumstances didn’t seem to warrant the Court’s demand for the physical presence of both petitioners, especially considering the challenges faced by petitioner no.2, who is ailing and would have to undertake a difficult journey from a distant location like Mumbai despite his medical condition.”
-the Supreme Court noted.
Consequently, the Supreme Court stayed the High Court’s order, allowing the appellants to attend the proceedings virtually.
“Efforts to achieve settlement by enabling the petitioners to participate in proceedings virtually should have been pursued. The contested order is likely to unfairly impact the petitioners.”
-the court opined, advocating for a more flexible legal process that acknowledges the potential of modern technology to aid in judicial proceedings.
The matter has been scheduled for a follow-up in July, where the appellants will appear online before the High Court.
ALSO READ: SC to Hear Bengal Govt’s Plea Over Calcutta HC’s Decision on 25,753 School Jobs
Advocates Pinak Kumar Mitra, Binish Kumar, Rishabh Singhle, and Sujoy Chatterjee, representing the appellants, highlighted the impractical demands of the High Court amid their clients’ health concerns.