The Delhi High Court requested a status report on the bail plea of Dheeraj Wadhawan, accused in a bank loan scam case. The trial court had denied his bail request, leading to the High Court’s intervention. Pending the report, the hearing is scheduled for June 10. The Supreme Court had earlier canceled the bail granted to the Wadhawan brothers.
The Delhi High Court instructed district courts to ensure smooth facilitation of video conference hearings to enhance efficiency and accessibility of judicial proceedings. The order emphasizes the need for infrastructure and technical support, aiming to modernize the judiciary and adapt to technological advancements. This move aims to make justice more accessible and transparent in the national capital, aligning with global standards of judicial operations.
Today, 25th April,Delhi Police granted an additional month by the court to investigate the recent security breach at Parliament, highlighting concerns about safety measures. The decision followed a formal request citing the need to examine witnesses and pending reports, with the court allowing accused individuals to interact with family via video conferencing. This extension adds 45 days to the investigation timeframe.
Today (25th April): Chief Justice Chandrachud criticized certain High Courts for imposing restrictions on accessing video-conferencing links, calling it a hindrance to judicial accessibility. He emphasized the operational benefits of virtual hearings and the need to remove unnecessary barriers. The judiciary’s investment in digitization is crucial for equitable access to justice.
New Delhi: A PIL filed in Delhi HC seeks suitable facilities for CM Arvind Kejriwal in Tihar Jail, emphasizing his role as an elected leader. It requests video conferencing for governance from custody. Background: Kejriwal’s arrest on March 21, subsequent remand on April 1, and concerns about media interference and demands for his resignation. Previous petitions to remove him were rejected or fined.
The Allahabad High Court mandated the use of video testimony for remote witnesses in cases outside its jurisdiction. It emphasized the importance of technology for efficient legal processes and instructed state authorities to ensure video conferencing facilities are utilized for evidence recording. The court also highlighted the need for coordinated efforts among relevant authorities.
The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a PIL seeking live streaming of court proceedings, citing the availability of video conferencing facilities. The division bench rejected the plea, emphasizing the existing provision of video conferencing. While some other high courts have embraced live streaming, the Rajasthan High Court will continue providing video conferencing facilities.