E- Is it “Petition Allergy”, “Application Phobia” or “Motion Disgust”?

(By  V. Ramkumar,  Former  Judge , High  Court  of  Kerala)

 

A learned Judge of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala has inter alia observed as follows:-

 

“13. It is noticed that numerous applications are being filed before the High Court and the Sessions Court for enlargement of time for the deposit of fine as the Trial Courts refuse to accept the fine/compensation after the period stipulated by the superior Courts, even after the decision of this Court in Girish v. Muthoot Capital (2007 (1) KLT 16).  It is to be remembered that the default sentence is not punitive, but is only a measure to enforce payment of fine/compensation ordered by the Court.  I make it clear that it is illegal, incorrect and unjust to refuse to permit the convict to deposit the fine amount after the date stipulated by the High Court/Sessions Courton the mere reason that no direction for extension has been granted by the High Court/Sessions Court.”                                                 (emphasis is mine)

 

(VideSubash Sait v. Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance  (2015 (4) KLT 497).

The question posed by the Judge at the commencement of the order is whether the convict can deposit the fine amount after the time stipulated by the High Court or Sessions Court, without any further direction from the High Court or Sessions Court, so as to avoid the default sentence.

 

The necessary facts

2.  The applicant before the High Court, was the accused who was  convicted by the Trial Court of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (“ N.I. Act” for short). It is not clear from the reported decision as to whether the sentence imposed by the lower courts consisted of a substantive sentence of imprisonment.  In a criminal revision filed by the convict, a learned Single Judge of the High Court confirmed  the conviction but modified the sentence to one of fine (`1,88,000/-) with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for 3 months.  It was also directed that the fine amount as and when realised should be given to the complainant under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. The convict was also given the option either to deposit the fine amount before the trial Court or to directly pay the compensation amount to the complainant within six months of the order.  In the event of direct payment, the convict was ordered to produce a memo (voucher) before the trial Court.  The convict did not deposit or pay the amount within the time granted by the High Court and, therefore, he got an extension of time from the High Court.  Even within the extended period he did not deposit or pay the amount.  Subsequently he made direct payment, and that too, in instalments to the complainant without any permission from the High Court. ( It is not known whether the acceptance by the complainant of the instalment payments was with full knowledge of the time limit fixed by the High Court because, the order extending time was evidently passed in the absence of the complainant. Even the reported decision has been rendered behind the back of the complainant and the counsel who was heard on the opposite side was the learned Public Prosecutor). After belatedly effecting payments to the complainant, the convict reported the matter before the Trial Court, evidently to avert action for enforcement of the default sentence.  But the trial Court was not inclined to accept the payment which was not within the period stipulated by the High Court.  The Trial Court accordingly initiated coercive steps for recovery of the fine  or for enforcement of the default sentence.  It was under these circumstances that the convict approached  the High Court for further extension of time.  The learned Judge not only dismissed the application but also directed that the payment effected by the convict was to be treated as one made in compliance of the direction of the High Court.  The Registry of the High Court was directed to communicate the order to all the Sessions Judges who in turn were directed circulate the order among all the judicial officers under them.

 

WHY  THIS   RESPONSE?

3. The order passed by the learned Single Judge virtually amounts to a command   to the lower Courts to ignore or even flout the time–bound directions issued by superior Courts.  The above order has overlooked certain practical aspects of the sentencing discretion exercised by the superior Courts.

 

4. Prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are never considered to be as serious as prosecutions for offences under I.P.C. or other penal statutes.  That   is presumably why the appellate or revisional Courts while confirming the convictions under the Negotiable Instruments Act, are lenient in the matter of sentence and very often, exempt the convict from the punishment of incarceration.  Such sentencing gestures by way of moderation are shown by the appellate   or revisional Courts usually behind the back of the complainants on the justification that as long as his share of recompense in the form of adequate compensation is paid to him, he cannot dictate the nature of the punishment to be meted out to the convict.  That is the reason why some Judges while granting extension of time to the convict without even sending notice to the complainant, would take care to ensure that the quantum of compensation is enhanced with every extension so that the complainant can have no grievance. But what is important to note is that the purpose of fixing a time–limit by the Court (whether it be the trial Court or appellate Court or revisional Court) is to ensure that if the convict does not adhere to the same he should then forfeit the judicial indulgence shown to him.  This is because, ordinarily, the fine payable under a sentence of fine, is to be paid forthwith.  (Vide Section 424(1) Cr.P.C.).  While under this provision of law, the convicting Court   can grant time for a period not more than one month, the said restriction may not be applicable to the High Court.  The indulgence by way of enlargement of time, after time was once granted, also can be shown only by the High Court by virtue of its inherent power. (Vide Sreedharan v. Bharathan(2014 (1) KLT 236 (D.B.) But if the convict does not make the payment within the time granted by the High Court, then he forfeits the judicial indulgence shown to him thereby becoming liable to the self-working direction of the sentencing Court that he shall undergo the default sentence.  This consequence can be averted by him only by again approaching the High Court for a ratification of the belated payment, if any, made.  If he does not do so, he may have to suffer the consequence of facing coercive action for the default sentence.  Even in cases where the convict is given the benefit of making direct payment to the complainant within a time-frame, the convict cannot take undue advantage of such benefit by making the payment at his own leisure and beyond the period fixed by the High Court.  It may be relevant in this connection to note that the complainant while accepting the payment without any demur, may not even be aware of the enlargement of time granted by the High Court or even the time-limit fixed by the High Court for payment, all done behind his back.  One should not forget that an informed complainant can even refuse to accept the belated payment and in such case also the convict will have to undergo the default sentence because any payment effected or attempted to be effected beyond the time-limit fixed by the High Court is no payment at all.  The relevance and applicability of Sections 68 and 69 of the Indian Penal Code will arise only when the convict actually undergoes the default sentence which then will have to be terminated upon payment of the fine amount in full or part. The illustration to Section 69 of the Indian Penal Code also envisages a situation in which the convict is actually undergoing imprisonment in default of payment of fine. This aspect of the matter was overlooked in the decision of another learned Judge in Girish v. Muthoot Capital Service(P) Ltd. (2007(1) KLT 16) which has been relied on in the reported case in question.   It is pertinent to note that even if the convict undergoes the full term of default sentence, his liability to pay the fine amount is not wiped off if the Court considers it necessary to issue the warrant for special reasons to be recorded in writing or if it is the very same fine amount which is directed to be paid as compensation to the complainant under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. (as in this case). (Vide the proviso to Section 421(1) Cr.P.C.).  Hence Sections 68 and 69 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be an answer to justify the refusal to comply with the time-bound direction in letter and spirit or for bye-passing the High Court.   Fixation of time-limit for compliance of the direction for deposit or payment within the extended period, should have some meaning.  Otherwise, it may even be possible for a convict to go abroad, mobilise sufficient funds, return to India after a few years and then deposit the amount before the trial Court and avert a default sentence.  The complainant also may have to be satisfied with the meagre amount fixed years ago. The High Court was not, in my opinion, right in blaming the lower Court for not accepting the payment which was admittedly made after the expiry of the time-limit fixed by the High Court.  The convict in the case on hand was, therefore, justified in again approaching the High Court for extension of time (really it involved a request for ratification of the belated payment).  In fact, going by the narration of facts in paragraph 2 of the reported decision, the coercive steps taken was for realisation of the fine amount which the Magistrate was entitled to take under Section 421 Cr.P.C.  (Vide Shine Varghese v. State of Kerala  (2008(4) KLT 371).   In fact,  in R. Mohan v. A.K.Vijayakumar  (2012 (3) KLT SN 46 (C.No. 47) SC)  the Apex Court put the default sentence as the common mode for the recovery of fine in a sentence of fine and for the recovery of an order for compensation.  This is what the Supreme Court has observed in paragraph 29 of the above verdict:-

 

“If Section 421 of the Code  puts compensation ordered to be paid by the Court on a par with fine so far as the mode of recovery is concerned, then there is no reason why the Court cannot impose a sentence in default of payment of compensation as it can be done in the case of default in payment of fine under Section 64 I.P.C”.

In my humble view, the learned Judge, went wrong in holding that it was unnecessary for the convict to approach the High Court. By means of the order in question, made “reportable”, the learned judge has blocked all petitions to be filed hereafter for enlargement of time. Is the judicial reluctance attributable to a “pendency phobia” or a “petition allergy”.What was ordered to be communicated to the lower Courts was an illegal direction.

 

5. Judicial personage of the superior Courts, before finding fault with their brethren at the lower tiers, should be doubly cautious to ensure that the mistakes pointed out are indeed avoidable legal infirmities.  This is particularly so in the case of those in the High Court since their orders and verdicts constitute binding precedents for the subordinate judiciary.  A good majority of errors are not committed deliberately or in bad faith unless the errant is found to be incorrigible or actuated by ulterior motives.  Omnibus directions of a general character for the lower Courts to follow, should be lawful directions consistent with the established procedure.  Otherwise, such directions may amount to a command to follow a procedure which is not sanctioned by law.

 

A New Legislation -- The Negotiable Instruments Amendment Ordinance -- No. 6 of 2015

Trial Jurisdiction -- Cases under Section 138 of N.I. Act

 

(By K.G. Joseph, Advocate, Aluva)

 

1. The impact of the new legislation locating jurisdiction for trial of prosecution cases under N.I. Act Section 138 as contained in the ordinance cited above is far reaching in the right direction with correct dimension. A sigh of relief from the anguish experienced by the Industrial/Commercial/Business/Trading/Banking/Economic world is visible out of their shock due to the dictum in the rulings of Hon’ble Supreme Court on Ist August 2014 with direction for trial of the Section 138 cases only at places of dishonour of cheque by the concerned paying Banks of the accused with retrospective effect. Before highlighting the salient features of the new legislation it will be highly noteworthy and most relevant that in the original Amendment Act 1988 and in the subsequent amendments there was no specific provision regarding the trial jurisdiction of Section 138 cases. As a result for a decade from April 1989 till 1999 the jurisdiction was based on the framework of I.P.C./Cr.P.C. provisions. After the dictum in the rulings in the two Judges Bench (1999 (3) KLT 440 (SC)) Bhaskaran’s case (K.T. Thomas, J.) of the Supreme Court, 5 places of jurisdiction was prevailing though with certain deviations under special grounds due to rulings/interruptions subsequent to it from Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Courts etc.

 

2. It may be noted that Amendment Act 1988 is keeping its distinct identity for offence under Section 138 being “deemed offence” out of the realm of mens rea - guilty mind “without involving moral turpitude”. “Technical and strict liability offence in commercial practice”. However the last judgment dated 1.8.2014 by 3 Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. (2014 (3) KLT 605 (SC) (Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod’ case) (Vikramajit Sen, J.) is historic/epoc making ‘in as much as trial jurisdiction of Section 138 cases has been rendered “accused centric” with I.P.C./Cr.P.C. domination as the places of Drawer’s Bank - paying Bank (Bank of the accused) was given prime importance for trial jurisdiction with retrospective effect without considering even the place of transactions between the holder and drawer which led to the issuance of dishonoured cheque and confining only to the place of Drawer’s Bank where the cheque was dishonoured. This has created innumerable hardships and untold miseries to the trading world disrupting their normal business transactions in as much as commercial world became reluctant to accept outside cheques for day to day transactions. Besides large scale transfer of cheque cases from the filing court to the new places of Drawer’s Bank especially at far distant places consequent on the rulings was a terrible blow to the business world dealing in cheques who considered it as a moral insult coupled with fatal financial injury inflicted on them for none of their fault after parting with their hard earned assets/money to the accused which has ended in cheque cases. Holders of cheque/complainant of cheque cases were confronted with disgruntlement, frustration and dissatisfaction which had adverse effects on their business mostly dealt in cheque transactions after Supreme Court rulings on Ist August 2014 fixing jurisdiction limiting only to the places of dishonour of cheque issued by the drawer.

 

3. The impact became most relevant/conspicuous in the legal parlour/profession of law which was found not encouraging apart from its adverse consequences on Industry and Commerce. There were Representations from Association of Industrial/financial intuitions/ trading sectors/economic field with regard to the discouraging implications of the near situations with particular reference to the industrial growth/commercial/business dynamism/trading facilities/ and over all economic growth of the country etc. Therefore comments in the Press/News papers/periodicals etc. with suggestions for remedies/solutions have been forth coming in large scale. In order to achieve the best results from the industry and business through cheque transactions the original identity of the enactment atleast prior to 1st August 2014 became enviable. The concerned authorities became aware of the new situations and ways and means were worked out at appropriate levels. The new piece of legislation in the form of ordinance became indispensable to minimize delay and to meet challenges. It is pertinent to note that ground realities based on facts findings/expertise on the subject matter have compelled the authorities/law makers to bring the present amendment which paved the way for the removal of impediments/ambiguities in the trial jurisdiction by confining/prescribing the two distinct identified places of jurisdiction under Section 142(2)(a) and (b) which is reproduced for ready reference of readers as under.

 

“142(2).The offence under Section 138 shall be inquired into and tried only by a court within whose local jurisdiction:-

 

(a) If the cheque isdelivered for collection through an account, the branch of the bank where the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account is situated or

 

(b) If the cheque presented for payment by the payee or holder in due course otherwise through an account, the branch of the drawee bank where the drawer maintains the account, is situated.

 

Explanation -For the purpose of clause (a) where a cheque is delivered for collection at any branch of the bank of the payee or holder in due course, then, the cheque shall be deemed to have been delivered to the branch of the bank in which the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account”.

 

4. It is pertinent to note that a fair approach towards the holder/creditor/payee complainant without sacrificing fairness to the interest of the drawer/debtor/accused are seen with specific clauses for jurisdiction for trial. Section 142A deals with “Validation for transfer of pending cases” in detail thereby making the trial of cases in its original place of filing except in certain situations mentioned therein. The inadequacy of the existing provision has been identified with the categorical status for jurisdiction with caution and vision avoiding any shadow of doubts. It needs mention/emphasis that the new legislation gives a fresh impetus to the commercial world dealing in cheque transactions for their multifarious business and they even treat the ordinance as a revival/renaissance of the original status of the 1988 enactment. It is interesting to note that business people consider it as a resurrection for their commercial activities in a newdimension/direction. A newtrend among the business people was in vogue to resort to primitive method of civil suits without availing the provisions of S.138 as a result of the 2014 1st August Supreme Court rulings. However such a trend is being changed in the light of new amendment from 15.6.2015. Reinstatement of jurisdiction to the places of Holders/payees Bank is really a salvation to the complainant in as much as he need not go after the drawers’ Bank in distant places. The interest of the honest holder of cheque is well protected under the new legislation as there is no escape to the dishonest drawer dictating the holder to go to his place for trial. The Business circle consider the new ordinance as the emancipator of the mercantile world from the encircling darkness of uncertainty regarding jurisdiction existing hitherto thereby restoring the life of the 1988 enactment with new spirit and. soul anticipated by the law makers.

 

5. The message in the amendment is to be understood by legal fraternity/ professionals by identifying the collecting Banker as holders’/creditors’/complainants’ Bank and the paying Banker as Drawers’/debtors’/accused’s Bank. If cheque is given by complainant to his Banker for collection the place of such Bank is the place of trial jurisdiction, when dishonoured. If the cheque is presented for payment by the complainant directly to the paying Banker over its counter the place of such paying Banker will be the place of trial jurisdiction when dishonoured. In Banking Law and practice this fundamental of banking is most relevant for the professional/legal practitioners in dealing with cases of N.I. Act under Section 138.While sharing the implications of the new ordinance regarding jurisdiction this writer feels to clarify the correct position by a speaking illustration to readers. If a Kochi Merchant gets a cheque of Aluva Bank from an Aluva Merchant the Kochi Merchant has got two options under the S.142(2). He can deliver the cheque at his Kochi Bank for collection through cheque transaction system and if dishonoured Kochi will be the place of jurisdiction under S.142(2)(a). Alternatively if Kochi Merchant takes the cheque in person and present it for payment over the counter at Aluva Bank and if dishonoured the place of jurisdiction will be at Aluva under S.142(2)(b). It is also noteworthy that any protection to defaulters of cheque against the genuine interest of aggrieved complainant is clearly removed in the new Amendment ensuring the realties of clearing under cheque truncation system and encouraging the use of cheques and enhancing its credibility for normal business transaction.

 

6. A blessing in disguise is noticed among business people/complainants in the context of giving retrospective effect by virtue of Amendment of Section 142A “validating the transfer of pending cases”. Actually the adverse effects on the pending cases as a result of Supreme Court rulings dated 1.8.2014 has been eclipsed by means of this section with suitable modifications in the light of S.142(2)(a) and (b). The business world has been activated and rejuvenated with a silver lining every where so as to enjoy the benefit of ordinance in business transactions with certainty/clarity of the fate of dishonoured cheque’s feature. There are positive directions and proper guidelines in the Amendment ordinance to the Bench and Bar for adhering to the ingredients relating to jurisdiction. A new ray of light has been thrown by the ordinance in the midst of encircling darkness in the areas of trial jurisdiction which is clearly removed by the amending provisions. According to the business world the agony/ordeal of the creditors came to an end with the promulgation of the ordinance with ever shining rosy petals on the glorious crown of Section 138 cases and the economic activities are started to achieve smart situations prevailed during the period prior to 1st August 2014.

 

7. It is noteworthy at this juncture that Mr. Markandey Katju (Chairman of the Press Council of India) made a valuable remark that “great changes were not brought by legislations made by judges, but by the power of people (the Hindu 5th March 2013). A valuable/precious relevance is attached to this statement in as much as the new legislation highlights the “power of people” in the form of ordinance after the Supreme Court rulings which is the law of the land in the matter of jurisdiction of Section 138 cases at present. It is a boon and not a bane in the present context. All the legislations by enactment/ordinance are the result of expertise on the subject matter while judicial versions on the same subject matter may not be with requisite expertise thereby warranting fresh legislation. This, writer does not incline to elaborate the subject as the circumstances led to the new legislation is widely assessed/discussed/under- stood by all concerned.

 

8. The piece of legislation covered by the ordinance is a golden thread binding the N.I. Act with that of the stable fabric of business norms and trading ethics resulting in normal commercial dealings encouraging ordinary economic activities with greater efficiency/expe- diency in the best interest of economic growth of the country. The spirit of the amendment ordinance is welcomed by all concerned with ovations of clapping hands and vibrant cheers without fear/anguish in the future business if cheque is dishonoured. The timely interference for settling the genuine grievances of the Industry/business/Trade/commerce with visionary zeal and without vested interest from the side of the concerned authority/lawmakers deserves felicitations/ appreciations/congratulations which are recorded herein with bouquet of fragrant flowers.

 

Third  Pillar  and  the  Fourth  Estate

(By K.Ramakumar, Sr. Advocate, High Court of Kerala)

 

Left to me personally I am all for complete freedom of the Media, occasionally even in excess. This, despite Neera Radia episode and the uninspiring Tehelka. This is because freedom of expression occupies a predominant place in our democratic country. Part III of the Constitution, which is described as its ‘soul’, gives us Article 19 guaranteeing freedom of thought, expression, belief, etc.  This is what the Supreme Court of India said about that valuable right:

 

“Indeed freedom of speech and expression is “life blood of democracy”, but this freedom is subject to certain qualifications”.

The American Supreme Court also shares the same view.  Justice Reid of the American Supreme Court said as follows:

 

“Free discussion of the problems of society is a cardinal principle of Americanism – a principle which all are zealous to  preserve. Discussion that follows the termination of a case may be inadequate to emphasize the danger to public welfare of supposedly wrongful judicial conduct. It does not follow that public comment of every character upon pending trials or legal proceedings may be as free as a similar comment after complete disposal of the litigation. Between the extremes there are areas of discussion which an understanding writer will appraise in the light of the effect on himself and on the public of creating a clear and present danger to fair and orderly judicial administration.  Courts must have power to protect the interest of prisoners and litigants before them from unseemly efforts to pervert judicial action. In the borderline instances where it is difficult to say upon which side the alleged offence falls, we think the specific freedom of public comment should weigh heavily against a possible tendency to influence pending cases. Freedom of discussion should be given the widest range compatible with the essential requirement of the fair and orderly administration of justice”.

 

Media in India enjoys absolute freedom leading to criticism levelled at some quarters that they are exceeding the limits set for them. Trial by the media is now a familiar expression.  In some quarters it is made as a lament while in some other as a lavish praise.  The Press does not however, enjoy any extra freedom than individual Indian citizens.  Nevertheless, we find in our country an overactive, zealous and alert media.  Could we ever imagine our democratic process without the media?  Sting operations also have been justified in some cases.  Even the English Courts have departed from the orthodox view in the matter of allowing freedom to the Press qua courts. A typical example is the now famous reaction of Lord Denning.  One of the leading newspapers gave a caption “Lord Denning is an Ass”.  The learned Lord reacted – “May be, I am one”.  Indian Courts however, appear to be more touchy and sensitive even to such criticisms.  The well-known ‘Sumban’ comment was decried and derided with a counter charge of ‘worm’ which did not bring much credit to judicial institutions.

 

The British have gifted us a fair and transparent system of justicing.  There is a provision in the Criminal Procedure Code that all criminal courts should be open to the public though not even minimal facilities are available to them, when they go there either to sit or ease themselves.  Nevertheless, unlike earlier times, Court cases do now attract wide publicity.  What was once boring bareterous and dry court proceedings have been made lively and interesting - Thanks to the Media. The teacher community, particularly at school levels, spend more time in the corridors of courts than in class-rooms. Channel discussions are held even about pending cases.  The orthodox and traditional view has undergone a change even in India. In Narmada Bachavo Andolancase the Supreme Court said:

 

“We wish to emphasize that under the cover of freedom of speech and expression, no party can be given a licence to misrepresent the proceedings and orders of the Court and deliberately paint an absolutely wrong and incomplete picture, which has the tendency to scandalize and bring it into disrepute and ridicule”.

The American Supreme Court however, has always applied the clear and present danger in the following words inBridges v. California (1941):

“where the adjudicatory processmay be hampered or (the court) hindered in its calm, detached and fearless duty on the basis of what has been submitted in Court”.

The Court said “will pose an imminent danger”.

Justice Frankfurter however, has taken a more liberal view:

“But increasingly the Court has recognized that publicity may in fact help achieve a fair trial by encouraging individuals with relevant information to come forward; by deterring perjury though public scrutiny, by exposing or preventing wrong doing by the prosecution, defence, or government; by reducing crime through public disapproval of it; and by promoting public discussion of important issues.”

Publicizing by television a pre-trial investigation against the accused has not been approved even in the United States. Justice Murphy of the United States Supreme Court said in one case:

“This was strong language, intemperate language, and we assume, an unfair criticism.  But a Judge may not hold in contempt one who ventures to publish anything that tends to make him unpopular or to belittle him.  The vehemence of the language used is not alone the measure of the power to punish for contempt. The fire which it kindles must constitute an imminent, not merely a likely threat to the administration of justice. The danger must not be remote or even probable; it must immediately imperil.  But the law of contempt is not made for the protection of Judges who may be sensitive to the winds of public opinion. Judges are supposed to be men of fortitude, able to thrive in a hardy climate. Conceivably a campaign could be so managed and so aimed at the sensibilities of a particular Judge and the matter pending before him as to cross the forbidden line”.

He added:

“A free press lies at the heart of our democracy and its preservation is essential to the survival of liberty.  Any inroad made upon the constitutional protection of a free press tends to undermine the freedom of all men to print and to read the truth.

In my view, the Constitution forbids a Judge from summarily punishing a newspaper editor for printing an unjust attack upon him or his method of dispensing justice. The only possible exception is in the rare instance where the attack might reasonably cause a real impediment to the administration of justice. Unscrupulous and vindictive criticism of the judiciary is regrettable. But judges must not retaliate by a summary suppression of such criticism for they are bound by the command of the First Amendment. Any summary suppression of unjust criticism carries with it an ominous threat of summary suppression of all criticism.  It is to avoid that threat that the first Amendment, as I view it, outlaws the summary contempt method of suppression.

Silence and a steady devotion to duty are the best answers to irresponsible criticism and those Judges who feel the need for giving a more visible demonstration of their feelings may take advantage of various laws passed for that purpose, which do not impinge upon a free press.”

The American attitude towards Press comments on pending trials vastly differ from the English. The American Courts have always refused to curtail freedom of the press even though there were instances where a new trial had to be ordered owing to a hostile atmosphere having been created by unrestricted publicity on the pending charges.  In England the Times Newspaper was taken to task for publishing what is known as ‘Talidomide case in contempt’.

 

In a later case, the Times Newspaper published a news item that the Irish Prime Minister had resigned when he really did not.  The question arose whether the publication was part of the privilege enjoyed by the Press. This led to what in English Law now is known as “Reynolds Principle”.  In Reynolds the Court declared the principle:

 

“The interest is that of the public in a modern democracy in free expression and, more particularly, in the promotion of a free and vigorous press to keep the public informed. The vital importance of this interest has been indentified and emphasized time and again in recent cases and needs no restatement here. The corresponding duty on the journalist (and equally his editor) is to play his proper role in discharging that function.  His task is to behave as a responsible journalist.  He can have no duty to publish unless he is acting responsibly any more than the public has an interest in reading whatever may be published irresponsibly. That is why in this class of case the question whether the publisher has behaved responsibly is necessarily and intimately bound up with the question whether the defence of qualified privilege arises.  Unless the publisher is acting responsibly privilege cannot arise…”

 

Reynolds principle was later approved in Flood v. Times Newspaper(2012).  Incidentally what is known as Auto Sankar ((1994) 6 SCC 632) on the rights of a journalist to publish has been referred by the House of Lords in Reynolds.

The English Courts as well as the Indian Courts have been adopting the view that the general obligation of the Press, Media and other publishers to communicate important information upon matters of general interest and the general right of the people to receive such information should be reckoned. The importance of the public interest in receiving the relevant information has to be weighed against the public interest in preventing dissemination of defamatory allegations with the injury that this causes to the reputation of the person defamed.  The ultimate test therefore, appears to be “is the Court likely to be influenced by the publication in determining the lis, if the answer is ‘yes’, the publication is not privilege, if it is otherwise ‘yes’.” In the well-known Sahara case it was contended that some of the media reports constitute contempt of pending proceedings and an order of postponement of the publication was obtained by the Saharas in 2012.  This is what the Supreme Court said in that case: “Open justice permits fair and accurate reports of court proceedings to be published. The Media has a right to know what is happening in Courts and to disseminate the information to the public, which enhances the public confidence in the transparency of court proceedings.  The Court, however, cautioned: “Excessive prejudicial publicity leading to usurpation of functions of the courts not only interferes with administration of justice, which is sought to be protected under Article 19(2).  It also prejudices or interferes with a particular legal proceeding”.

 

In another case the Court made the following observations:

 

“The distorted reporting of the court proceedings has the tendency of lowering the dignity of the institution and brings the entire institution of judiciary to ridicule in the eyes of the public and also shakes the people’s confidence in the independence and integrity of the institution”.

 

A balancing act therefore, has to be undertaken. While faithful reporting of proceedings by the Media serves a significant public performance, discussion on evidence, launching tirade against a party or system demonizing party to the case having the effect of interference with the right to fair trial. The Supreme Court declared: “Media, in that sense performs a vital public service and is a communicator and link between the courts of law and the people.”

 

Ultimately the Court declared the principle:

“There is danger, of serious risk of prejudice if the media exercises an unrestricted and unregulated freedom such that it publishes photographs of the suspects or the accused before the identification parades are constituted or if the media publishes statements which outrightly hold the suspect or the accused guilty even before such an order has been passed by the Court.  Despite the significance of the print and electronic media in the present day, it is not only desirable but least that is expected of the persons at the helm of affairs in the field, to ensure that trial by media does not hamper fair investigation by the investigating agency and more importantly does not prejudice the right of defence of the accused in any manner whatsoever.  It will amount to travesty of justice if either of this causes impediments in the accepted judicious and fair investigation and trial”.

Even the Press has no right to intrude on the privacy of an individual, particularly when the Supreme Court is now seized of the issue whether the right to privacy is part of the fundamental rights. 

 

Given the enormous revolution for Information Technology, it will be unrealistic to forget the Global trends and the rapid strides in technology.  Even live televisation of court proceedings is permitted.  Rules are in place even for live blogging and twitting from the court room. Yet, in Jayalalitha’s application for Bail the visual media went wrong.

We have thus reached far ahead of the days when the Constitution was enacted and the fundamental rights enshrined. This, no doubt is an opportunity as well as responsibility on the Press. 

 

Before concluding therefore, I would appeal to our Media brethren:

Please continue to be as much aggressive and over-reacting as you are now. Please do not however be selective either on the basis of caste, creed or station in life of individuals. Avoid at any rate becoming regular customers in defamation courts - Regular customers get more in courts, not less.

      

 

E-Judiciary  and  Its  Importance  in  E-Governance  System -- A Study

(By Yadukrishnan. B., Advocate, High Court of Kerala)

 

“The day might come when we lawyers also shall use an electronic machine in predicting judicial behavior and when the courts will use one in arriving at their decision”.

                                                                           -- Japanese  jurist  T. Hayakawa

 

Administration of justice is one of the primary functions of the State. State administers justice through courts and tribunals.1 The concept of e-judiciary has been evolved as one of the resultant products of e-governance of the modern world which is computer savvy. This is an initiative of information technology which had acted as an eye - opener at the need of over burdening of courts with mounting cases which could not be resolved manually even at least with minimal difficulty. E-Justice is considered and rendered as an organ of e-governance.2 The idea of ‘e-courts’, was first conceptualized by former Chief Justice of India R.C. Lahoti.

 

Information Technology (I.T.) has found its way into legal practice and as a part thereof to the judiciary3. The extent to which I.T. is used in judiciary can be looked from two angles. One is the use of information technology to improve the present paper based system by bringing in the advantage of I.T. to increase the speed enormously and also to bring greater transparency. Information Technology can be used in functions like filing the schedules, posting of cases, grouping of cases and so on. Information Technology can increase the speed of justice delivery system, thereby enhancing the efficiency of the system. The second aspect of the use of I.T. in judiciary is when the computer network is used for trials of crimes in cyber space. The Information Technology Act, 2000 also identifies the type of offences and by and large the same old courts which operate on the paper based system also have to deal with these cases4.

 

Objectives of  the  E-Court  System

From 2001-2003, 700 city courts in four metros were computerized and during 2003-04, computerization of another 900 courts were undertaken. Need was felt to make the programme of ICT enablement of the Indian Judiciary mission-critical. Under NeGP, an integrated Mission Mode Project was conceived and was titled ‘e-courts’. Main objectives of e-courts Project were:

 

      1)         To help judicial administration of the courts in streamlining their day-to-day activities.

      2)         To assist judicial administration in reducing the pendency of cases.

      3)         To provide transparency of information to the litigants.

      4)         To provide access to legal and judicial databases to the Judges5.

 

The e-Courts scheme aims I.C.T. enablement of lower courts across the country in their functioning. The project envisages the deployment of hardware, software and networking to assist district and taluk courts in streamlining their day to day functioning. Key functions such as case filing, allocation, registration, case workflow, orders and judgment will be IT-enabled. Cause-lists, case status, orders, judgment will be available on the web and made accessible to litigants, advocates and general public. The e-Courts project thus aims to build a national grid of key judicial information available 24/7 in a reliable and secure manner6.

 

Information  Technology  in  Indian  Judiciary  --  Courts  Projects  and  Information  Systems

Courts Information Systems Projects (COURT IS-Project) are computer based software applications that integrate many judicial, administrative and miscellaneous functions of courts7. These software packages vary from simple applications to very complex solutions depending on the goals and scope defined by court administration. Implementation of COURTIS can definitely improve efficiency and quicker dispensation of justice. Further, these projects are cost effective. Hence, COURTIS project is considered imperative for judiciary in India with the advent of modern computer technology.

 

In 1992, the Chief Justices of High Court’s Conference decided to implement the computerization project in their courts on the lines of Apex Court’s Computerization Project. Thus the COURTIS project was developed by NIC8. Following are some of the applications which have been successfully implemented at Supreme Court and 18 High Courts and these applications have either direct or indirect impact on the masses:

 

1)   List  of  Business  Information  System  (LOBIS)

LOBIS involves computerization of scheduling of cases to be heard by the courts on the following day. It enables the Registries of Supreme Court and High Courts in eliminating manual process of Cause List generation, thus avoiding any manipulation by vested interests. These databases contain details of fresh cases, disposed and pending cases. It is the backbone application of every Court9.

As Cause Lists are generated automatically by the computer, manual intervention has been eliminated resulting in smooth and timely generation of cause lists.

 

2)  Filing  Counter  Computerization

Computerization of filing process in Supreme Court and High Courts is another outcome of COURTIS project. Computerized filing counters receive fresh cases which are filed before Supreme Court and High Courts. Data entry operator in these counters enters preliminary details required for registration such as party names, advocate details, etc. Queries and defects are instantaneously addressed. Time limitation is also checked by the system automatically. This has streamlined the filing process. The amount collected towards Court fees in a day is automatically calculated10.

 

Computerized filing counters make filing process easy. Advocates and litigants do not have to languish in the queue to file their cases. Court fee collected is calculated automatically. Litigants query is answered by the operator in counter, saving the precious time and energy of litigant to go around different sections. Computerized filing counters thus serve as ‘single window’ for advocates and litigants. Filing process is made orderly.

 

3)  Case  Status

Case - status gives the latest information with respect to the status of a case like: case number, disposed/adjourned, lower court details, party and advocate names, date on which last listed, waiting position, subject category along with exact verbatim of the text of the Court’s order. The moment a case is filed in the court, its ‘Case - Status’ is available on the web, giving filing details such as dairy number date of filing, etc. Litigants can find out whether their cases have been filed in the court or not without contacting the advocates. The ‘Case-Status’ also provides all orders pertaining to a case, delivered so far by the court11.

 

4)  Courtnic

COURTNIC is an information system designed to provide information on the Apex Court to a wide range of users. COURTNIC is intended to cater to the information requirements of judges of the lower courts, advocates, litigant public and others who are interested in the judgments of the Apex Court. Databases of COURTNIC are created by NIC and maintained by the Supreme Court. Information will be available to the litigant public at nominal charges. COURTNIC answers about two hundred queries of litigants/advocates per day all over the country on the status of their pending cases. Primarily COURTNIC information is available in all NIC-High Court Computer Cells and in some District Courts. It has got 3 basic objectives. Firstly it enhances the confidence in the judicial process. Secondly it provides online Apex Court information to the litigant community across the country within the shortest possible time. Thirdly it helps in providing an easy flow of information12. These are the main objectives of the COURTNIC system.

 

5)  Cause  lists  on  the  internet

Cause Lists are scheduling of cases to be heard by the courts on the following day. NIC servers host cause lists of Supreme Court and various High Courts. Currently, cause lists of Supreme Court and 21 High Courts and 10 Benches are maintained by NIC. The Cause list application is the backbone application of all courts as no court can function without that day’s Cause list.

 

Hosting cause lists on the internet becomes a boon in certain circumstances. Firstly, it severely reduces the cost of generating daily cause list as they are already using available infrastructure and software of NIC. Secondly, advocates are able to receive the cause lists almost immediately after court hours. Thirdly, advocates can generate their own cause list, containing their own cases. Fourthly, availability of cause lists on internet means that a litigant will now be in a position to know the exact position of his case, without depending on his advocate.

 

6)  The  Judgment  Information  System  (JUDIS)

The JUDIS or Judgment Information System is an online case law library developed by NIC13. JUDIS consists in complete text of all reported judgments of Supreme Court and several High Courts. In the case of Supreme Court all reported judgments in Supreme Court Reporter (SCR) since its inception, i.e, from 1950 onwards are available. While judgments reported in SCR till 1993 have head notes, all cases reported in SCR after 1993 are available in JUDIS without head notes. Judgments can be accessed through party name, advocate, Date of judgment and more importantly by free text search. This enables the users to retrieve all relevant judgments on a particular subject.

 

7)  Daily  orders  on  the  Internet

Daily orders of Supreme Court and High Courts are available on the internet. Uploading of daily orders take place as soon a judge signs the orders. It is the easiest way for litigants to get a copy of the latest order delivered in the court from their residences/offices. The free text based search enables the users to access relevant orders of the court on the same subject14

 

8)  Computerization of  Courts  --  Supreme  Court,  High  Courts  and  Subordinate  Courts

Computerization of Courts in India commenced during early 1990’s. Under COURTIS project, several projects have been initiated in Supreme Court, High Courts and subordinate courts. Flagship projects are mentioned above. Apart from these projects a few more projects deserve mention:

 

9)  Filing  Defects  on  Web

In close co-ordination with the Registry of the Supreme Court of India, NIC has implemented ‘Filing Defects’ along with the already implemented ‘case-status information system’ on the Supreme Court’s web site.

 

10)  Digitization  of  Old  Records

Followed by the successful computerization of many decision making and decision support system, NIC has taken up computerization of Digitalization of Old Records i.e. Disposed Case files.

 

11) Suplis

This package contains the citation Information of all reportable cases decided by the Supreme Court. It provides citation from five Journals and cases can be easily located on the basis of citation.

 

12)  Digital  Display  Boards  on  Internet

NIC developed an application tool to convert the Digital Display of the display board and make it available on Supreme Court’s Web Site. Digital Board Information can be accessed at (www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in).

 

13) Supnet

It is application software developed by NIC which provides information access about employees of Supreme Court.

 

14) E- Kiosks

Kiosk is a booth with an open window on one side15. An electronic kiosk houses a computer terminal that often employs custom kiosk software designed to function flawlessly while preventing users from accessing system functions16.

 

15)   Interactive   Voice   Response   System (IVRS)

The litigant public can access the status of their cases filed in the Supreme Court using an ordinary telephone using IVRS.

 

16)   Computerization   of   High   Courts

National Informatics Centre (NIC) also took up the task of computerization of High Courts along the lines of Supreme Court. NIC implemented LOBIS in all High Courts. Court orders/proceedings are digitized. Software has been developed for storing and retrieval of orders. Record Room Information System which keeps track of all old files and maintains records of the consignment of matters have been implemented. Another application developed is the Notice Generation, which generates notices to be served to litigants/advocates issued by the registry.

 

17)  Computerization  of  Subordinate  Courts

In 1997 NIC took up the computerization of all 430 District Courts in the country. In
2002-2003 NIC took up the computerization of the City Courts of four metropolitan courts i,e., Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai. Under the project, many decision making, decision support and public interface application areas which will help in simplifying routine activities and provide easy and transparent access facilities to the litigant public, are taken up for computerization17.

 

NIC has taken up the Computerization of City Civil Courts off 26 States and Union territories under its project  City  Civil  Courts  Information  System  (CC-COURTIS)”18.

 

18)  Application  Software  for  Courts

In addition to mega a project, NIC has also developed several application softwares meant for various administrative branches of the Courts. Some of them are payroll application software, Budget Monitoring System (BMS), Revision & Gradation Process Information System (RGPIS), Certified Delivery System (CCDS), Library Information System (LIS), Disposal Information System (DIS), Vigilance Monitoring System (VMS), and Works Monitoring System (WMS) etc.

 

19)  Case  Finder  Software’s

Many private law reports have developed simple and efficient case finder software’s to their subscribers. Prominent among them are All India Reporter, which had digitized their case reports and are marketed as AIR Supreme Court and AIR High Courts. Supreme Court Cases had launched their case finder software called SCC Online19. Manupatra is another online legal database, which provides latest decisions of Supreme Court, High Courts in addition to maintaining huge archives of earlier decisions20. In Kerala, Kerala Law Times (KLT) has launched its case finder software called 'Verdis’.

 

E- Filing  o f F.I.R.

Recent trend with respect to filing of F.I.R. is that now we can file F.I.R. electronically. This is a great gift from science and technology. The Government must allow the online filing of first information reports in rape cases as that alone will ensure mandatory and automatic registration of complaints.

 

On January 18, 2013, Delhi Police Chief Neeraj Kumar announced that Zero First Information Reports (F.I.R.s) may be registered on the basis of a woman’s statement at any police station irrespective of jurisdiction. This means women can file an F.I.R. at any police station and the complaint is required to be registered on the basis of the woman’s complaint verbatim. Mr. Kumar stated: “The woman’s statement has to be taken as gospel truth and a probe needs to be initiated on its basis.”

 

At the same time, the Delhi Police Chief announced a series of other measures such as the recruitment of 418 women sub-inspectors and 2,088 women constables, deployment of PCR vans outside women’s colleges, the provision that women can call 100 to seek assistance to be dropped home at night by a PCR van, and 24-hour police cover for areas around entertainment hubs with heightened security between 8 p.m. and 1 am. While the foregoing measures must certainly be welcomed as an important step forward towards making the criminal justice system functional, it is surprising that e-governance has not been utilized by the Delhi police as an important solution in a country which is considered the world’s leading provider of IT enabled solutions.

 

As shown by the introduction of the Zero F.I.R., the starting point towards improving criminal justice is the filing of the criminal complaint itself. It is well known that the filing of F.I.R.s, particularly for cognizable offenses, is an extremely difficult exercise — more so for a rape victim who has to ceaselessly recount the horrific event. Police stations often refuse to register FIRs for cognizable complaints, and innumerable rapes around the country go unreported. The victims then are forced to file a private complaint in court under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) seeking an order directing the police to register an F.I.R.

 

The online registration of F.I.R.s was supposed to be implemented by 2013. On
March 21, 2012, the then Union Home Minister, P. Chidambaram, stated in the Rajya Sabha that online registration of F.I.R.s would be possible once the server and network connectivity was established by the end of 2012 or early 2013. However, the online filing of F.I.R.s will be made possible only upon the implementation of the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS), an ambitious `2,000 crore project of the Home Ministry, aimed at increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of policing through e-governance by creating a state-of-the-art IT-enabled crime tracking system for investigation of crime and detection of criminals.

 

Under CCTNS, 14,000 police stations will be automated as well as 6,000 Offices of Higher Police Officials. The CCTNS is a platform for sharing real time information by law-enforcement agencies, which will improve identification of criminals and crime investigation. Funds in the amount of `418 crore have reportedly been released to the States/Union Territories and4.54 lakh people have been trained. The CCTNS project was supposed to be completed in March 31, 2012. However, in June 2012, the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) extended the deadline to March 2015.

 

Electronic Application for Summons

Filing an application via web service

By using the electronic services of the judicial administration, a creditor may file an application for a summons concerning undisputed debts, follow the processing of the application, and obtain a decision in the matter. The service is available in Finnish and Swedish.

 

Service for companies and corporations filing numerous applications for a summons (Santra system) The service is primarily intended for those who file numerous applications for a summons, such as professional debt collection agencies. Electronic filing of an application for a summons via Santra system is reserved for simple and undisputed “summary” debt collection cases. The system transfers the electronic applications sent by the plaintiff to the case management system of the District Courts.

 

The creditor must, at his or her own expense, develop software for his or her own information system in order to be able to compile such application records that meet the set format criteria. The file format descriptions for Santra are available at the ICT Service Centre for the Judicial Administration, which also checks that the technical requirements have been met21.

 

E-Filing  of  Pleadings

With the development of Information technology a party can file his plaint in the civil court electronically. Plaint is the statement filed by a plaintiff in a civil suit against the defendant, whereas written statement is the reply filed by the defendant against the plaint filed by the plaintiff. These two constitutes pleadings in general. Before the development of E-commerce and I.T. law the common man faced some difficulties with respect to the filing of pleadings before the court. Now everything has been changed and speeds up because of the E- filing of pleadings. This itself ensures a clean pattern of administration of justice from Indian judiciary and provides easy access to justice to the common man.

 

Under C.P.C. the provision of demeanor of witness is highlighted. With the development of Information technology in the Indian Judiciary the procedure with respect to demeanor of witness and examination has been done electronically which proves to be very much effective than what it was before.

 

Impact  of  Right  to  Privacy  under  E-Judiciary

Right to privacy is an important right guaranteed to each and every citizen. It is an implicit rights under Art 21of the Indian Constitution. Right to privacy in India has twofold sources (a) Common law; (b) Constitutional law22. Under the common law of tort, a private action for damages for unlawful invasion of privacy or defamation applies23. Under the Constitutional law, the right to privacy regarding one’s private life is implicit in the fundamental right to life and liberty which is guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution, which includes a right to be let alone.

 

Information Technology Act, 2000, which is the nodal legislation as far as information technology is concerned, did not contain any specific provision to address the issue of cyber privacy and data protection. Section 72 of the I.T. Act is titled, “penalty for breach of confidentiality and privacy”. However, the scope of this section is too narrow. In its application, this section would be extremely limited since it covers offences only by authorities such as Adjudicating Officers, members of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal or Certifying Authorities under the Act. Section 43 also provides penalties for unauthorized access to a computer system, unauthorized extraction of information from a computer resource.

 

Impact  of  Online  Dispute  Rsolution  under  Indian  Judiciary

ODR can be defined as a branch of dispute resolution which uses technology to facilitate the resolution of disputes between parties. It primarily involves negotiation, mediation or arbitration, or a combination of all three. In this respect it is often seen as being the online equivalent of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). However, ODR can also augment these traditional means of resolving disputes by applying innovative techniques and online technologies to the process.

 

ODR is a wide field, which may be applied to a range of disputes; from interpersonal disputes including consumer to consumer disputes (C2C) or marital separation; to court disputes and interstate conflicts. It is believed that efficient mechanisms to resolve online disputes will impact in the development of e-commerce.

 

Significance  of  Artificial  Intelligence  in  Judicial  Decision  Making

The Artificial Intelligence technique has found its way in various fields like Banking, Academics, and Business Management and now in Judiciary also momentum is rising to include the Artificial Intelligence in decision making process and it is being already done in some of the countries and providing good results. However, Indian courts and the Judges do not seem prepared yet to accept the technology for better performance of the justice delivery system. The reason being ignorance of the technology, less skilled staff although, computer technology has already been dispensing the ministerial functions of the courts. One grey area has still been there which can very well be rectified by the use of artificial intelligence technology and that is the typing of judgments that has become very serious issue for the delivery of justice in due time and the reason of unnecessary delays. That facet of Al is the Voice Recognition Technique which also requires Al for recognizing and identifying the words that are being delivered during the trial or final decision of the court. The Voice recognition technique has basically two types Speaker Dependant which is commonly used for dictation software and the Speaker Independent mainly found in telephone applications. The Speaker Dependant Voice Recognition Technique has worldwide usage in the Courts and it is high time for Indian Judiciary also to use and accept the technology for the efficient functioning of the court system and thereby preventing the precious time of the courts from being going waste.

 

Voice  Recognition  Technique  and  Courts

One of the most critical aspects of the judicial process is the requirement that a verbatim record be created for virtually all judicial activities. This “record” had been created and kept using three primary methods until just a few years ago. The earliest records of judicial proceedings were recorded by pen and ink. This usually involved a scribe quickly writing briefs of court proceedings during or immediately after court. Different forms of shorthand writing were implemented in the nineteenth century. Machine stenography was invented in the early part of the twentieth century and remains a popular method used by the courts. Personal computer and word processing had a major impact on transcript preparation. Subsequent inventions of computer aided transcription quickly moved machine stenography to a higher technology based process. The invention of sound recording machines in the form of tape recorders spawned the use of these devices to create an analogue recording of court testimony and proceedings. Another method involves an operator repeating every word being said into a mask. Voice recognition software converts the spoken word to type for further use. Automatic speech recognition (ASR) as it is called in some countries is the process by which a machine (e.g., computer) is able to recognize and act upon spoken language or utterances. An ASR system typically consists of a microphone unit, computer, speech recognition software, and some form of audio/visual/action output. A popular ASR application is the automatic conversion of speech to text, which has the potential to increase work output efficiency and improve access to and control of various computer applications, such as word processing, email, dictation and document retrieval. The voice recognition technology has already been used by the stenographers for writing judgments through voice recognition software also termed as “voice writing”. Voice recognition systems have been tested by the Austrian Justice since 1997 and already in use in European courts by the judges. At that time a group of 10 voluntary judges and public prosecutors were equipped with voice recognition systems consisting of a notebook with headset and the program “Voice Type Simply Gold” by IBM. Both hardware and software have progressed significantly since then. Nowadays the voice recognition program can be supported by the standard equipment of all workstations, so no additional hardware is necessary.

 

Voice  Recognition  and  the  Lawyer

In the legal profession, planning for an appeal often begins as early as drafting the complaint or answer to the initial suit, and sometimes even before that. Clients frequently call upon a firm to assist their trial counsel in specific areas, including the initial formulation of a case, briefing and arguing motions, developing legal theories and trial strategy, preparing trial briefs and jury instructions, and briefing and arguing post-trial motions in anticipation of an appeal. Because time is always of the essence in the judicial system, the ability to quickly move case information into a digital workflow is critical to maximizing the analysis time for each client. Surprisingly, in this predominantly electronic business age, a majority of attorneys and judges are still behind the information technology curve. These legal professionals are drowning in a sea of tedious and costly manual processes for creating, collecting and organizing case data. Law offices large and small, as well as local and federal courts are looking for affordable tools that can help them effectively reduce their operating costs and increase productivity.

 

The lawyers also have so much work load that they have no option but to rely and take the support of paralegals which raises their work costs and ultimately the pocket of client is affected and also the accuracy of the cases is not ensured depending on the support involved. However, researches have proved that the voice recognition technique has improved the work efficiency by manifolds. An advocate is the officer of the Court and has the duty to assist the court in the administration of the justice. Therefore, efficiency in their work leads to the efficiency in the administration of justice itself. Now, lawyers do not need to produce excuses before the court for not being prepared for the presentation of their cases. The lawyers in India can take better advantage of this computer technology and help the judicial system to regain the confidence of the people.

 

Voice  Recognition  and  the  Challenges

Speech recognition software has advanced greatly since it was first invented, but it still has several big problems that prevent it from being used exclusively as a method of transcription. Some of the speech recognition problems that are difficult to solve include variations in the speech. There also is the problem of not knowing the context of the words being spoken, which can lead to text that has no punctuation or inaccurate spellings. However, leading speech recognition tools can offer up to 99 percent accuracy right out of the box. Using specialty vocabularies can heighten accuracy even further. Some speech recognition software programs include a legal vocabulary - incorporating Latin and French law terms, reporter names, and abbreviations in addition to the standard business vocabulary - and can automatically recognize and format federal, regional, and state citations. For certain programs, specialty legal vocabularies can also be created in-house or purchased from third-party sources. Every law firm uses specific names, terminology, acronyms, or other vocabulary unique to its specialty or its client base. These unique terms are frequently used in court papers, correspondence, and other legal documents. Now, the software carries inbuilt functions customizing, modifying, editing and deleting the vocabulary causing acoustic ambiguity, which can be used as per the requirements of a particular court. Voice recognition technology in the courtroom allows real time recording of the proceedings. A fully effective digital voice recognition system would eliminate the need for court reporters to be present in court at all and the same can be had from reliable companies dealing with the same. Real time transcripts can appear on computer screens in the court minutes after the proceeding occurs. The issues of security, originality and the rectification where ever required have to be taken due care of. The proper training and skill in the usage of technology will reduce the chances of cons associated with the technology.

 

Conclusion

As a concluding remark it can be said that Information Technology has made deep inroads into the way governance is carried out in India. This impact is visible in the field of administration of Justice, with the evolution of concepts like E-Justice, E-Courts etc. However, the impact of information technology on judiciary is only structural, not normative. Information technology can help judicial process24. Computers can store the flood of past and current legal materials to permit instant retrieval. Apart from the promise of information retrieval, the mere retrieval of head-notes, extracts, summaries or full texts of judgments, statutes or legal literature, offers in calculable savings in search time. Up to this level computers can assist judicial process.

 

Foot Note:

1.   See Dr.N.K.Jayakumar, Lectures in Jurisprudence, 2nd Ed.(2006), Lexis Nexis Butterworths, p.175

2.   K.Pandurangan, “e-Justice - Practical Guide for the Bench and the Bar”, 2009 Edition, Universal, P.73.

3.   Anja Oskamp, Arno R. Lodderand Martin Apistola (Ed), IT Support of the Judiciary -Australia, Singapore, Venezuela, Norway, The Netherlands and Italy, (2004), T.M.C Asser Press, The Hague, P.l.

4.   N.Vittal, E-Courts and E-Justice, available at http: //iacits2005.iitm.ernet.in/presentations/E Courts Mr Vittal.pdf<>(visited on 30.7.2013); see also Praveen Dalai Enforcing ‘rules of justice’ through e-governance, available at http://www.egovonline.net/articles-list/45-cover-storv/3786- enforcing- rule-of-justice-through-e-govemance.html<> (visited on 31.7.2013)

5.  See http://ecourts - pms.nic.in/<> 1-8-2013; See also K. Pandurangan, “e-justice - Practical Guide for the Bench and the Bar”, 2009 Edition, Universal, p.80.

6.   e-Courts Mission Mode Project: The Journey So Far. See Supra

7.   K.Pandurangan, “e-Justice-Practical Guide for the Bench and the Bar”, 2009 Edition, Universal, P.88.

8.   Good Governance through I.C.T, (2005), National Informatics Centre (NIC), p.63.

9.   www.lobis.com.nic.in (visited on 2.8.13).

10. http://indiancourts.nic.in/courts/itiniud.html (visited on 2.8.13).

11. http://courtnic.nic.in/ (visited on 2.8.13).

12. K.Pandurangan, “e- Justice -Practical Guide for the Bench and the Bar”, 2009 Edition, Universal, pp.95-96.

13  www.judis.nic.in (visited on 2.8-.3)

14. www.courtnic.nic.in ( visited on 2-8-13)

15. http: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiosk (visited on 2.8.13)

16  Ibid.

17. Good Governance through I.C.T., (2005), National Informatics Centre (NIC), P.67.

18. K.Pandurangan, “e-Justice - Practical Guide for the Bench and the Bar”, 2009 Edition, Universal, P.107.

19. www.scconline.com (visited on 1.8.13).

20. www.manupatra.com (visited on 1.8.13)2.

21. http://www.oikeus.fi/15959.htm (visited on 25th August 2013).

22. R.Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu ((1994) 6 SCC 632).

23  Ibid.

24. Julius Stone, Social Dimensions of Law and Justice, 2nd (Indian Reprint) 2009, Universal Law Publishing, p.690; of Julius Stone, Legal System and Lawyers’ Reasonings, 3rd (Indian
Reprint) 2008, Universal Law Publishing, P.40.24.          Julius Stone, Social Dimensions of Law and Justice, 2nd (Indian Reprint) 2009, Universal Law Publishing, p.690; of Julius Stone, Legal System and Lawyers’ Reasonings, 3rd (Indian Reprint) 2008, Universal Law Publishing, P.40.

The  Parkway  Collision--
Extract  From  1999 (1) KLT  Journal  Page No. 8

 

(Article by T.G. John, Advocate, Trichur)

 

This happened in the United States of America. In May, 1963 the Parkway Collision was the talk of New York City. In the City’s Henry Hudson Parkway, a north bound car suddenly plunged through a six foot divider hedge, skittered into the south-bound traffic and smashed head-on into another car. All of the people in the north bound car a seven year old boy, his great-grandparents, his great-aunt and a friend of the family were killed. In the midst of a gathering crowd, Gareth Martinis the driver of the other car (a young man of 23) peered into the mangled cars and advised spectators not to move the bodies. Then he ran off leaving his car parked on a nearby exit road. He was arrested a short time later but he sullenly refused to submit to the drunkometer test. He violently grabbed a Press photographer by the throat, clawed and kicked at the police struggling to pull him away and bit a cop’s finger. Martinis was charged with drunken driving, reckless driving and leaving the scene of accident. He faced a maximum penaltyof 1500 dollars and three years in jail.

 

Gareth Martinis was the son of Acting Supreme Court Judge Joseph Martinis who had sat as a Judge since 1950 in City Criminal Court, gaining a reputation for delivering strong reprimands to careless drivers. When New York City newspapers learned about the arrangements for Martinis’ trial before the three-Judge-Panel in New York City Criminal Court they emitted growls of protest. But the District Attorney insisted that young Martinis would not get any special favour because of his father’s position. Said the D.A. “It does not matter if he is the son of a Judge, or a President or a Governor. We treat them all alike.”

 

Trial started. Two policemen testified that Martinis seemed drunk when he was arrested. But three other cops testified that Martinis appeared to be sober. During the four day hearing, the prosecution case was very badly weakened by the conflicting testimony. The three judges deliberated only five minutes to find the judge’s son innocent of all charges.

The State Department of Motor Vehicles held a hearing of its own. It found out that Gareth Martinis was arrested for speeding three times in 16 days in 1959, had once got his licence cancelled and then got it back by lying about past convictions. And the Department of Motor Vehicles dealt out the hardest punishment on him, after finding that Gareth was driving while drunk and was unsteady on his feet atleast one half hour after occurrence. It revoked Gareth’s driving license. Euqene Kramon, a Manhattan slacks manufacturer who was the only survivor of the Parkway collision, heard of the penalty and murmured “Giant Punishment” and turned twice in his hospital bed.

 

Sometimes we feel really concerned about public morality. It is our chief and indeed our only protection against tyranny and exploitation. If we could not rely on our politicians to give an honest account of their official conduct and intentions, if we could not rely on our civil servants to administer affairs impartially, if we could not rely on our Magistrates and Judges to enforce equality before the law, if we could not rely on the police not to practice torture and not to manufacture evidence, if we could not rely on the press to make an honest attempt to ascertain the facts and to report them fairly, not only should we be deprived of any control over the conduct of public affairs but we should be denied the security which is essential for our private well being. Among all forms of official wickedness, the perversions of justice outrages us most. Not that the egoism, or even the stupidity of a politician or the corruption of a civil servant may not do more harm. But we look on the law as our protection against the infringement of what we take to be our rights. Even though the laws themselves may be oppressive or discriminatory there is some safeguard in their being honesty applied. And we feel most deeply threatened and wounded when a miscarriage of justice arises out of political, racial or communal prejudice.