She referenced the recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Sarvesh Mathur v. Registrar General, High Court of Punjab & Haryana.

In this case, a three-judge bench, consisting of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, issued a directive that all High Courts must take measures to guarantee that no member of the bar is deprived of access to video conferencing facilities or the opportunity for hybrid hearings.

In her complaint dated 01.11.2023, the counsel emphasized that virtual access encompasses not only the ability to participate in one's own case but also to observe the entirety of court proceedings. She pointed out that this principle has already been adopted by the Jodhpur Bench, thereby reducing the likelihood of advocates missing the chance to gain entry to the virtual courtroom.

The counsel asserted that when she attempted to participate virtually in a case, she found herself stuck in the lobby for an extended period, unable to access the video conferencing. According to the counsel, her screen displayed a message that read, 'you can join the meeting after the host admits you.' However, the court master or moderator claimed that the counsel was not present in the lobby at the required time, resulting in the adjournment of the matter.

On the contrary, the counsel asserts that she was still waiting in the lobby when the above-said information from the court master was intimated by the local counsel present there. She has annxexed relevant screenshots in this regard.