Today, while speaking at the National Conference on Digitisation held in Odisha, the Chief Justice of India mentioned the changing system of litigation through technology, in his speech, CJI said, judges have to embrace technology for the benefit of litigants and litigants cannot be burdened because judges are uneasy with technology.
The CJI directs High Courts to continue using technology-enabling hybrid hearings, pointing out that such facilities are not meant for use only during the COVID-19 pandemic.
"In one of my judgments which I was editing last night, I have said we cannot burden our lawyers due to our uneasiness with technology. The answer is simple: retrain ourselves," CJI Chandrachud said.
"Some High Courts have disbanded the video conference system but the infrastructure is in place. The question is not about the infrastructure but are we using it? I get a lot of PILs from lawyers across India that hybrid hearings have been stopped. I would appeal to the Chief Justices that please do not disband that infrastructure and technology was not confined to the COVID-19andemic and it was for COVID and beyond," he underscored.
In the context of the top court recently launching a new version of its e-filing portal for crowd testing, the CJI said,
"We have engaged with lawyers and clerks of lawyers and we are in final stage and it is called awareness. We have aksed AoRs etc to come in groups who would be made aware of e-filing. The munshi and clerks are being trained and they cannot be left behind in the march of technology. The idea is to have mascots (representative members of the bar) who will do all e-filings, before we make it mandatory for all. Once e filing is there, there should ne no physical filing."
He reiterated that the top court is not meant for just Delhi but exists for the entire country.
He further, emphasised that Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools would be handy even as judges' discretion would be necessary for aspects like sentencing.
"We do not think we want to cede our discretion, which we exercise on sound judicial lines in terms of sentencing policy. At the same time, AI is replete with possibilities and it is possible for the Supreme Court to have record of 10,000 or 15,000 pages? How do you expect a judge to digest documents of 15,000 pages, which comes with a statutory appeal?"
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy