Author: Krisha Shah — Law Graduate from Jitendra Chauhan College of Law
To the Point
The judicial system in India is gradually integrating technology through the introduction of E-Courts, shifting from physical courtrooms to digital platforms and transforming the way courts function nationwide. Through the E-Courts Mission Mode Project, courts across India are adopting technology-driven procedures such as e-filing, virtual hearings, video conferencing, and online case tracking.
With the launch of Phase III in 2023, the focus has moved from basic digitisation to building a fully digital court ecosystem. This transformation is guided by the objective of making justice more efficient, transparent, and accessible, in line with Article 21 of the Constitution.
However, the shift also brings challenges such as digital literacy gaps, data protection concerns, and questions about maintaining the open court principle. This article analyses the legal framework, recent developments, and impact of e-Courts on the Indian judiciary.
Use of Legal Jargon
1. E-Courts:
Courts enabled by electronic processes, recognised under India’s E-Courts Mission Mode Project, aimed at digitising court functions.
2. Virtual Hearings:
Judicial proceedings conducted through video conferencing platforms, legally upheld as valid and equivalent to in-person hearings by the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003).
3. E-Filing:
Digital submission of pleadings, petitions, and affidavits, now authorised in most High Courts through procedural rules and practice directions.
4. Open Court Principle:
A constitutional doctrine ensuring that court proceedings (trials and hearings) remain transparent and accessible to the public, rooted in Article 145 of the Constitution, now extended to include live-streaming in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018).
5. Audi Alteram Partem:
A principle of natural justice requiring that all parties be given a fair opportunity to be heard — equally applicable to virtual hearings.
6. Case Information System (CIS):
The primary digital platform used by Indian courts to record and manage case data, developed under the E-Courts Project. Unlike internal court tools, CIS is public-facing, allowing litigants, lawyers, and citizens to access case status, daily orders, cause lists, and judgments online. It also serves as the foundation for the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), which enhances judicial transparency and accountability through real-time access to case data.
7. National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG):
A public dashboard developed under the E-Courts Project that provides real-time data on case pendency, disposal rates, and judicial performance across District and Taluka courts. It draws data from the Case Information System (CIS) and serves as a transparency and policy-monitoring tool for the judiciary, government, and citizens.
8. Neutral Citation System:
A standardized digital citation format introduced by the Supreme Court in 2023, ensuring consistent online referencing of judgments.
9. Judicial Infrastructure:
Includes not just buildings but also digital infrastructure (servers, cloud-based data systems), now legally considered part of judicial capacity under Phase III reforms.
10. Judicial Review:
The power of courts to assess the legality or constitutionality of actions taken by public authorities — extended even to digital systems and administrative decisions within e-Courts.
The Proof
I. Phased Implementation of E-Courts
E-Courts is one of the Mission Mode Projects (MMPs), launched in 2005 as part of the National e-Governance Plan (NeGP), alongside initiatives like e-District, e-Police, and e-Hospital.
The E-Courts Mission Mode Project has been implemented in three progressive phases, aimed at digitising and modernising the Indian judiciary, thereby making justice more accessible, efficient, and transparent.
A. Phase I (2007–2015)
Focused on basic computerisation of District and Taluka courts. Over 14,000 courts were computerised using the Case Information System (CIS) software developed by NIC. This phase laid the groundwork for online case tracking and daily cause lists.
B. Phase II (2015–2023)
Extended digital services to litigants, lawyers, and court staff, including facilities such as e-filing, e-payment, video conferencing, and public access to case status. The National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) was also launched, offering real-time court data for public viewing.
C. Phase III (2023–ongoing)
Approved by the Union Cabinet in July 2023 with a budget allocation of ₹7,210 crore, Phase III aims to establish a fully paperless, interoperable digital court ecosystem. Key components include:
i. Digital court records and judicial dashboards
ii. Integration with police, prisons, and forensic departments
iii. Use of cloud technology and AI for case flow management
iv. Improved accessibility for citizens in regional languages
These phases show a systematic transformation of the judiciary from physical to digital, backed by government policy and institutional funding.
II. Constitutional, Statutory, and Judicial Backing
A. Article 21 of the Constitution
The right to life includes the Right to Access to Justice, as interpreted by the Supreme Court. E-Courts enhance this right by ensuring timely and affordable justice through digital means.
B. Information Technology Act, 2000
Legalizes the use of electronic records, digital signatures, and video conferencing. Sections 4 to 10A provide statutory validity to electronic documents and communications.
C. Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Under Section 61, electronic records such as digital documents, emails, and audio-visual files are admissible as evidence, reinforcing the legal basis for virtual hearings and e-filing in Indian courts.
D. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Amendments)
Provisions such as Order XI Rules 1–6 encourage electronic discovery and inspection of documents, especially in commercial litigation.
E. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003)
The Supreme Court affirmed that evidence recorded via video conferencing is legally admissible and equivalent to in-person testimony. While this was earlier interpreted under Section 273 of the CrPC, the principle now continues under Section 356(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
F. Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018)
Upheld the Open Court Principle and approved live-streaming of constitutional bench proceedings, promoting transparency in the digital era.
G. Neutral Citation System (2023)
Introduced by the Supreme Court to standardise digital citation of judgments across all High Courts and the apex court.
H. Law Commission of India Recommendations
The 230th Report (2009) and 245th Report (2014) of the Law Commission strongly recommended the adoption of information technology in courts to reduce delays, enhance judicial productivity, and increase transparency. These reports recommended the implementation of e-filing systems, digital case monitoring tools, and robust technological infrastructure across all tiers of the judiciary.
III. Challenges & Limitations of the E-Courts Project
While the E-Courts initiative has significantly enhanced judicial efficiency and accessibility, it also presents several practical and constitutional challenges:
1. Digital Divide and Accessibility
A considerable section of the population — especially in rural and economically weaker regions — lacks access to the internet, digital devices, and digital literacy. This digital divide risks excluding vulnerable litigants from the benefits of e-courts.
2. Data Privacy and Cybersecurity
The absence of a robust personal data protection law and the increasing use of cloud-based systems raise concerns regarding the security of sensitive judicial data and the privacy rights of litigants. Courts handle confidential materials, and any breach could have serious implications.
3. Open Court Principle
The constitutional mandate of open justice, embedded in Article 145(4) and reaffirmed in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018), emphasizes that judicial proceedings must be open to public scrutiny.
While E-Courts have introduced tools such as live-streaming and virtual hearings, the lack of uniform implementation, restricted access to hearing links, and absence of mandatory public streaming in many cases raise concerns about whether technology is fully preserving the open court principle.
4. Infrastructure & Human Resource Gaps
Courts in remote areas often lack stable internet connectivity, digital equipment, and trained technical staff. Judges, advocates, and court personnel may also require regular capacity-building and upskilling to keep pace with new digital systems.
Abstract
The E-Courts initiative, launched as a Mission Mode Project under the National e-Governance Plan (NeGP), marks a transformative step in digitising India’s judicial system. Through phased implementation, the project has introduced technology-driven mechanisms such as e-filing, virtual hearings, online case tracking, and judicial dashboards. The current Phase III, approved in 2023, envisions a paperless and fully interoperable digital ecosystem for courts.
This article explores the legal framework supporting E-Courts, including constitutional protections under Article 21, statutory provisions from the Information Technology Act, and judicial precedents endorsing digital procedures. It also addresses critical concerns such as data privacy, digital divide, and the open court principle. By analysing the progress, challenges, and implications of this transition, the article highlights how E-Courts are reshaping access to justice in contemporary India.
Case Laws
The Indian judiciary has proactively supported the integration of technology into court proceedings through various judgments, especially in the context of access to justice, virtual hearings, and open court principles.
1. Krishna Veni Nagam v. Harish Nagam (2017) 4 SCC 150
Held:
The Supreme Court held that in matrimonial disputes where the parties are located in different states, courts may consider video conferencing to avoid unnecessary travel and expenses. The judgment recognized the cost, delay, and hardship involved in physical appearances and encouraged digital alternatives for procedural efficiency.
Relevance:
Reinforces the idea that virtual hearings protect access to justice, particularly in sensitive or logistically difficult cases.
2. In Re: Guidelines for Court Functioning through VC during COVID-19 (2020)
Held:
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Supreme Court exercised its constitutional powers under Article 142 and issued binding guidelines for all courts to function via video conferencing. This became the uniform standard for courts across India, ensuring continuity of justice even during lockdowns.
Relevance:
Highlights how the court institutionalized digital infrastructure as part of regular judicial functioning, especially in emergencies.
3. Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637
Held:
Although focused on internet restrictions in Jammu & Kashmir, this case recognized that access to the internet is essential to exercise fundamental rights, including the right to access courts, information, and free speech under Articles 19 and 21.
Relevance:
Strengthens the constitutional foundation for digital access to courts, reinforcing that technology must be available to ensure rights are not denied.
4. Gujarat High Court (2021) – First to Live-Stream Proceedings
Held:
The Gujarat High Court became the first constitutional court in India to live-stream its proceedings on YouTube, following the spirit of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Swapnil Tripathi. The initiative was later adopted by other High Courts, setting a precedent for digital transparency.
Relevance:
Responds directly to open court principle concerns, ensuring public access through technology.
5. Other Landmark Cases
a. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003) – Recognized video conferencing as valid evidence under criminal procedure.
b. Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018) – Upheld live-streaming as essential to open justice, especially for public interest cases.
Conclusion
The E-Courts Project marks a transformative shift in the Indian judiciary, moving from traditional courtroom procedures to a digitally empowered justice delivery system. Through its phased implementation under the National e-Governance Plan (NeGP), the initiative has introduced vital features such as e-filing, virtual hearings, case tracking, and digital document management — significantly improving efficiency, transparency, and accessibility.
Constitutional backing under Article 21 and judicial recognition in various Supreme Court rulings have strengthened the legal legitimacy of digital courts. The current Phase III reflects the judiciary’s long-term vision of creating a unified, paperless, and interoperable court ecosystem.
However, for this digital transformation to be truly inclusive and sustainable, challenges such as the digital divide, privacy concerns, infrastructural gaps, and adherence to the open court principle must be systematically addressed. Technology must be used not merely to modernize, but to ensure that the core values of justice — fairness, openness, and accessibility — are preserved in the digital age.
FAQS
Q1. Is there any statutory backing for virtual hearings and electronic evidence in India?
Yes. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (which replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872) under Section 61 recognizes electronic records — including emails, digital documents, and audiovisual files — as admissible evidence, giving statutory legitimacy to virtual hearings and e-filings.
Q2. How do E-Courts ensure judicial transparency through data?
The National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), powered by data from the Case Information System (CIS), provides real-time access to pendency, disposal rates, and judge-wise case data. This promotes data-driven transparency and allows public and institutional scrutiny of court functioning.
Q3. What is the role of the judiciary in driving digital transformation — is it only an executive project?
While the E-Courts Project is implemented by the Department of Justice (executive wing), its design and evolution are heavily influenced by judicial leadership, especially through E-Committee of the Supreme Court, which frames policies, templates, and functional requirements for uniform adoption across all High Courts.
Q4. How has the judiciary addressed concerns regarding the open court principle in virtual hearings?
In Swapnil Tripathi (2018), the Supreme Court endorsed live-streaming in constitutional cases. Further, several courts have released protocols to enable public access to virtual links, though this is still evolving. The Gujarat HC’s YouTube livestream is a practical model that other courts are gradually emulating.
Q5. Can litigants or lawyers be disadvantaged due to the digital divide?
Yes. Despite technological advances, lack of internet access, digital literacy, or compatible devices can exclude marginalised litigants, especially in remote regions. Courts and Bar Councils are now working toward providing e-Seva Kendras and digital literacy programs to bridge this gap.
Q6. What reforms are proposed to ensure uniform adoption of E-Courts across India?
The Law Commission and E-Committee of the Supreme Court have recommended:
Mandatory digital infrastructure standards for all courts
Centralised software and cloud storage systems
Training for judges and lawyers
Open APIs for data sharing among courts, prisons, and police
These reforms aim to standardise and unify implementation.
Q7. Are virtual courts the same as e-Courts?
Not exactly. E-Courts refer to a broad digital ecosystem covering case filing, document management, dashboards, and online services. In contrast, virtual courts specifically refer to online judicial proceedings (hearings conducted via video conferencing), which are just one component of the larger E-Courts framework.
Q8. Why is there no uniform implementation of E-Courts across India?
While the project is centrally coordinated, each High Court manages its own subordinate courts, leading to differences in adoption, infrastructure, training, and priorities. This federal structure causes variation in digital readiness and service delivery across states.
Q9. How does India’s E-Courts initiative compare with global practices?
Countries like the United Kingdom, Singapore, and Estonia have adopted AI-assisted case scheduling, digital courtroom analytics, and fully remote small claims courts. India’s E-Courts initiative is among the largest in scale but still evolving in terms of standardisation and automation.
Q10. Are there any ongoing steps to improve public access and user experience in E-Courts?
Yes. Under Phase III, courts are working toward:
A unified e-Courts portal with multilingual access
User dashboards for litigants to track case progress
Enhanced mobile applications for real-time updates
Improved public access to orders, judgments, and cause lists
