The Madras High Court recently emphasized that trial courts are not permitted to deny lawyers and litigants the opportunity to attend court hearings virtually through video conferencing.

This observation was made by a bench of Justices SM Subramaniam and M. Jothiraman, while hearing the case of a remand prisoner who raised concerns about his prolonged solitary confinement in jail.

The prisoner, Fakrudeen, also brought to the Court's attention his inability to secure legal representation, as the court was located far from his place of residence, making it inconvenient for lawyers to appear in person. During the hearing, several lawyers raised grievances regarding the lack of essential facilities at the trial court in Poonamallee.

These included inadequate toilet and drinking water facilities, and the denial of virtual appearance through video conferencing.

The Court issued directives to address these complaints. "Video conferencing is now a rule set by the High Court and no court has the authority to deny this facility," the Court affirmed. It also took note of allegations that lawyers were being treated disrespectfully and were not even allowed basic amenities like water while waiting for their cases.

In response, the Court instructed the Registrar of the City Civil Court in Chennai to ensure the provision of adequate toilet and drinking water facilities for both lawyers and litigants. 

Fakrudeen, who has been in judicial custody since 2013 in connection with multiple bomb blast cases, also informed the Court that despite pursuing a BA in Political Science, he was denied educational materials such as books. He claimed to have faced mistreatment by prison authorities, including physical abuse and the denial of newspapers. The Court ordered the prison authorities to ensure that Fakrudeen’s fundamental rights were protected, and that he received all entitlements according to the law. The Bench had interacted directly with the prisoner after he was brought before the Court on January 27.

The Court reaffirmed that prisoners have the right to basic human dignity, including the right to education, which plays a key role in rehabilitation. "Education offers prisoners hope and helps them use their time in detention meaningfully, fostering better lives once they are released," the Court stated.

Additionally, the Court asked higher prison authorities to investigate Fakrudeen’s claims of unnecessary solitary confinement and mistreatment. The prison authorities, however, argued that Fakrudeen’s behavior had led to conflicts and disciplinary issues. The Court advised the prisoner to cooperate with the authorities to avoid further issues.

The Court also facilitated the appointment of a defense lawyer, with Fakrudeen’s consent, to represent him at the Poonamallee trial court. It instructed the District Legal Services Authority to arrange for the payment of legal fees for the appointed lawyer, B. Mohan, in accordance with applicable rules.