Emphasising that technology introduced in courts is meant to remove barriers to justice rather than create them, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that videoconferencing facilities should be meaningfully utilised to ensure that the administration of justice remains “accessible, efficient and adaptable to practical exigencies” without causing undue hardship to litigants or witnesses.
Justice Virender Aggarwal passed the ruling while setting aside a Chandigarh Trial Court order that had declined permission to record the testimony of a key witness through videoconferencing in a succession and inheritance dispute concerning a Will registered more than four decades back.
“The very object underlying the implementation of such procedural mechanisms is to ensure that the administration of justice remains accessible, efficient and adaptable to practical exigencies without causing undue hardship to litigants or witnesses,” Justice Aggarwal observed.
The ruling came on a revision petition filed by a litigant seeking permission to examine an attesting witness, whose testimony was stated to be essential for proving the due execution and attestation of a Will dated December 21, 1979, registered on January 25, 1980.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocates Jatin Bansal, Keerti Sandhu and Prabhjot Kaur contended that the witness was material and indispensable. They submitted that an application had been moved before the trial court seeking permission to record her testimony through videoconferencing as she was around 78 years old, residing in Gurugram and facing compelling personal circumstances. It was stated that she had been attending to her husband, who was suffering from stage-IV cancer, severe cardiac ailments and diabetes, making it difficult for her to travel to Chandigarh for deposition.
The trial court dismissed the request, leading to the present challenge before the high court. Allowing the petition, Justice Aggarwal noted: “It is pertinent to note that the requisite technological infrastructure for conducting proceedings through video conferencing has been made available to all courts with the object of facilitating access to justice and ensuring expeditious adjudication of cases,” the court observed.
Referring to the videoconferencing rules framed by the high court, Justice Aggarwal noted that a provision permitted the use of videoconferencing facilities at all stages of judicial proceedings, thereby conferring “a wide procedural ambit” for the use of technology in the administration of justice. Rule 8 specifically dealt with the recording of witness testimony through videoconferencing.
After considering the matter in its entirety, the high court held that the request for examination of the witness through videoconferencing could not be termed unreasonable or unjustified. “The witness in question is of advanced age and, as brought to the notice of the Court, has recently suffered the loss of her husband after attending to his prolonged medical condition. Such circumstances constitute valid and compelling grounds warranting invocation of the procedural mechanism of recording evidence through virtual mode,” Justice Aggarwal observed.
The court further found that the trial court had failed to adequately consider the High Court’s Video Conferencing Rules as well as the technological infrastructure specifically established for facilitating judicial proceedings through virtual mode, including the recording of witness testimony.
Addressing a possible concern regarding identification of signatures and documents during virtual examination, the high court clarified that no legal or procedural impediment existed. “Copies of the documents proposed to be shown to the witness may be transmitted by the trial court to the witness in advance, enabling the same to be duly put to her during the course of examination through videoconferencing in accordance with law,” the court observed.
Allowing the revision petition, Justice Aggarwal set aside the impugned order and directed the trial court to proceed with recording the witness’s testimony through video conferencing in accordance with the applicable rules and procedure.
