UPSET with the Supreme Court’s decision making physical court hearings mandatory twice a week, senior advocate Kapil Sibal Wednesday mentioned the matter before a Chief Justice of India-led bench expressing his concerns over forcing lawyers to appear physically.
Sibal said in many cases the files run into 50-60 volumes, and it would be difficult to have just one advocate inside the court.
“There shouldn’t be a hard and fast rule on a physical court hearing. The court needs to consider its pros and cons. Many High Courts are giving the option of hybrid hearings; the same can also be done here”, Sibal stated.
CJI N.V. Ramana interjected and said, “We are starting physical hearings because some bar associations were saying “We are not interested in opening the Court”.” When the CJI inquired what the difficulty was in having a physical hearing just two days a week, Sibal said he, along with other senior advocates, could explain in person if given an audience.
CJI Ramana said that a five-judge committee had taken the decision, and that he would consult them on the reservations expressed by Sibal.
Opposing Sibal, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Vikash Singh said those senior advocates who faced difficulties coming to court for a physical hearing could take a break for six months to a year till the pandemic gets over.
Young advocates are suffering financially because of virtual hearings, he said, going on to ask for physical court hearings every day.
The Supreme Court last week issued a circular stating that in view of the encouraging response from the Bar and with a view to further facilitate hearing through physical mode, all the matters listed on Wednesday and Thursday would be heard only in the physical presence of the counsels/parties in court-rooms.
