Author: Shubhi Gupta, Gautam Buddha University
ABSTRACT
The Indian judiciary, historically challenged by case backlogs and infrastructural constraints, underwent a significant transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic with the advent of virtual courts. Through tools such as video conferencing, e-filing, and digital workflows, the justice system adapted rapidly to the crisis, turning what began as an emergency response into a more permanent fixture across many courts. Though celebrated as a milestone in the digitization of legal processes, virtual courts have also raised important concerns regarding equity, procedural integrity, and the digital divide. This article examines whether virtual courts promote or hinder access to justice, outlines the existing legal framework, highlights key judicial decisions, and presents a balanced analysis of their potential to shape the future of India’s judicial framework.
TO THE POINT
Virtual courts refer to the use of digital platforms that enable the conduct of judicial proceedings through online mechanisms. These courts utilize a range of technological advancements, including:
Video conferencing for the conduct of hearings and trials
E-filing systems for submitting petitions, affidavits, and other legal documents
Digital signature facilities to authenticate documents
Online portals for the payment of court fees, penalties, and fines
The e-Courts Services mobile application, which provides real-time access to case statuses, hearing schedules, and judgment uploads
The transition toward virtual courts gained momentum in response to the unprecedented disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In an effort to prevent the complete halt of judicial functioning, the Supreme Court of India, exercising its suo motu powers, directed all courts to adopt technology-driven alternatives to maintain judicial continuity.
While virtual courts have played a pivotal role in ensuring that the wheels of justice continued to turn during the public health crisis, they also raise critical concerns. The digital divide in India is stark—many citizens, especially those in rural and underprivileged communities, lack access to reliable internet connectivity, devices, or digital literacy. Additionally, questions have been raised about the effectiveness of virtual hearings in preserving procedural fairness, particularly in cases involving vulnerable litigants or witnesses who may struggle with technology.
As the legal system evolves into a hybrid model—combining physical and digital processes—the essential question persists: Do virtual courts truly democratize access to justice by removing geographical and procedural barriers, or do they risk reinforcing existing socio-economic exclusions? This inquiry lies at the heart of evaluating the future of virtual adjudication in India.
USE OF LEGAL JARGON
To critically assess the impact of virtual courts, it is important to understand the legal and technical concepts that govern their functioning:
Audi Alteram Partem: This foundational principle of natural justice, which means “hear the other side,” is at risk in virtual proceedings, especially when participants face connectivity issues or lack technological proficiency, thereby impairing meaningful participation.
Procedural Due Process: Ensuring that legal processes are fair, transparent, and just is a core tenet of due process. In virtual settings, concerns arise over whether such fairness is maintained, particularly for unrepresented or digitally disadvantaged litigants.
Open Court Principle: Traditionally, judicial proceedings are conducted in public view to promote transparency and maintain public trust in the judicial system.
E-filing and E-service: These refer to the submission of legal documents and service of notices through digital platforms. While efficient, these methods require robust digital infrastructure and user awareness to function effectively.
Digital Divide: This concept refers to the unequal access to digital technologies and internet connectivity, which poses a major barrier to fair participation in virtual court proceedings, particularly for marginalized and rural communities.
Although virtual courts may satisfy certain statutory requirements, their alignment with constitutional protections under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and Article 14 (Right to Equality) remains debatable. The lack of uniform digital access and procedural safeguards potentially compromises the rights to equality and fair trial, necessitating a deeper examination of their legal and ethical legitimacy.
THE PROOF: ADVANTAGES (The “Boon” Argument)
1. Reduction in Delays and Costs
The adoption of virtual courts has led to a noticeable decrease in delays and expenses traditionally associated with in-person court proceedings. Parties and legal professionals are no longer required to travel long distances, reducing commuting time and associated costs. Additionally, hearings are less likely to be postponed due to logistical issues such as the unavailability of counsel or parties, resulting in quicker case disposal and better judicial time management.
2. Enhanced Operational Efficiency
Digital court systems have improved the overall efficiency of the judiciary by enabling swift scheduling, real-time case tracking, and timely notifications. Matters that are procedural in nature—like bail applications, traffic offence cases, and uncontested divorce proceedings—can be disposed of expeditiously. This allows the judiciary to allocate physical courtroom resources more effectively to cases that require detailed hearings and evidence examination.
3. Environmental Sustainability
The virtual court model contributes positively to environmental conservation. The transition to digital filings, electronic notices, and online documentation reduces the consumption of paper, ink, and physical storage. Furthermore, minimizing travel to courtrooms significantly lowers carbon emissions, aligning the legal sector with broader environmental sustainability goals.
4. Judicial Continuity in Emergencies
The outbreak of COVID-19 highlighted the importance of having a flexible legal system capable of functioning during crises. Virtual courts played a critical role in ensuring the uninterrupted delivery of justice during lockdowns and can be instrumental in maintaining legal operations during future disruptions such as natural disasters or public emergencies.
5. Better Record-Keeping and Transparency
It facilitates in providing the digital recordings and archiving of hearings. These recordings serve as authentic records of judicial activity, promoting transparency and accountability. They also provide a reliable basis for appellate review, helping prevent procedural discrepancies and enhancing trust in the judicial process.
CHALLENGES (The “Bane” Argument):
1. The Digital Divide
A major challenge posed by virtual courts is the exclusion of individuals who lack reliable access to digital resources. Litigants from rural areas, economically marginalized groups, and elderly or technologically inexperienced lawyers often face significant barriers in using online platforms. This disparity threatens the foundational principle of equal access to justice and risks creating a justice system that primarily benefits those with digital literacy and infrastructure.
2. Infrastructural Limitations
Although urban courts have made strides in adopting virtual technologies, many courts in smaller towns and semi-urban regions face serious infrastructural deficits. Inconsistencies such as poor internet connectivity, outdated hardware, frequent power disruptions highlight the uneven implementation of digital justice across the country.
3. Concerns over Security and Confidentiality
Conducting judicial proceedings online brings with it a host of cybersecurity risks. Legal data—including witness statements, evidentiary materials, and judgments—can be vulnerable to breaches, unauthorized access, impersonation, and digital sabotage. Without strong encryption protocols and well-defined data protection regulations, the privacy and security of judicial proceedings remain vulnerable to potential breaches.
4. Dilution of Courtroom Atmosphere and Discipline
The gravitas and decorum traditionally associated with in-person courtrooms often diminish in virtual environments. Judges may encounter difficulties maintaining authority and decorum when participants appear from informal settings. This can undermine the seriousness with which proceedings are treated and affect the perceived legitimacy of the judicial process.
5. Restricted Public and Media Oversight
Transparency is a vital element of judicial accountability. However, virtual court hearings may unintentionally limit public access and media scrutiny if they are not live-streamed or if access links are not readily provided. Such limitations pose a challenge to the open court principle and may reduce public trust in the fairness and transparency of virtual proceedings.
CASE LAWS
1. In Re: Guidelines for Court Functioning through Video Conferencing during COVID-19 (2020)
In a suo motu proceeding, the Supreme Court acknowledged the imperative to sustain judicial functioning amid the COVID-19 crisis. Recognizing the extraordinary circumstances, the Court issued comprehensive guidelines for all High Courts to implement video conferencing mechanisms for court proceedings. This initiative laid the institutional groundwork for the integration of virtual hearing infrastructure across Indian courts, ensuring continuity of justice during periods of restricted physical access.
2. Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018)
This landmark case stemmed from a law student’s petition seeking public access to live court proceedings. The Supreme Court acknowledged that live-streaming court proceedings advances the right to access justice under Article 21 and reinforces the right to information enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The judgment emphasized transparency in judicial processes, particularly in matters of constitutional and national importance, thereby setting the stage for future digital reforms in courtroom accessibility.
3. Krishna Veni Nagam v. Harish Nagam (2017)
In a matrimonial dispute involving parties residing in different locations, the Supreme Court took note of the burdensome nature of repeated in-person appearances, particularly for women. The Court approved the use of video conferencing as a viable solution to alleviate the physical, emotional, and financial burdens faced by parties involved in personal law disputes. This judgment underscored the role of technology in enhancing access to justice, particularly in cases involving sensitive issues or significant logistical challenges.
4. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020)
Although primarily concerned with the admissibility of electronic evidence under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, the Supreme Court’s ruling in this case reaffirmed the critical importance of adhering to procedural safeguards when dealing with digital records. The judgment underscored that technological integration into the judicial process must not compromise legal standards or the integrity of evidence.
CONCLUSION
Virtual courts have brought a significant shift in India’s justice delivery system by promoting speed, accessibility, and technological integration. They have proven especially useful in managing procedural and less complex matters such as bail applications, interim reliefs, and certain civil disputes, where in-person appearances are not strictly necessary.
To ensure that virtual courts become a sustainable and equitable component of the Indian judiciary, several measures must be undertaken. Addressing the digital divide is a critical priority. This includes substantial investment in digital infrastructure, internet connectivity, and user training—particularly in rural and marginalized areas where technological access is still limited. Judicial officers, legal practitioners, and litigants alike must be equipped with the skills and resources necessary to navigate virtual platforms effectively.
Second, constitutional principles such as the right to a fair trial and the open court doctrine must be safeguarded in the digital realm. Ensuring public access to virtual hearings through livestreaming and publishing hearing links can uphold transparency and accountability. Third, the temporary measures adopted during the pandemic need to be replaced with a well-defined and permanent statutory framework to regulate the functioning, scope, and limitations of virtual courts.
Lastly, adopting a flexible hybrid model—wherein litigants and courts can choose between physical and virtual hearings based on the complexity and nature of the matter—offers a balanced approach.
Only by addressing these structural and constitutional concerns can India fully realize the promise of virtual courts while upholding the foundational values of access, fairness, and justice.
FAQS
1. What is a virtual court?
A virtual court is a digital platform where judicial proceedings are conducted online through video conferencing, e-filing, and digital document management. It enables judges, lawyers, litigants, and witnesses to participate remotely, eliminating the need for physical presence in a courtroom.
2. Are virtual court proceedings legally valid?
Yes, virtual proceedings are legally valid in India. The Supreme Court, exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, and various High Courts under Article 226 and Section 482 CrPC, have recognized and legitimized virtual hearings. Additionally, the Information Technology Act, 2000 supports the legal sanctity of electronic records and signatures.
3. Can a trial be fully conducted online?
While procedural matters, civil disputes, and bail hearings are often handled virtually, full criminal trials involving cross-examination are rarely conducted entirely online. This is due to concerns about fairness, witness credibility, and judicial assessment of demeanor, which are more effectively handled in physical settings.
4. Can litigants appear from any location?
Yes, with prior court permission and reliable internet, litigants and lawyers can join proceedings from any location. This saves time and costs, particularly benefiting those in remote or rural areas who otherwise face logistical challenges in accessing courts.
5. What challenges do lawyers face in virtual courts?
Lawyers often face issues like lack of digital literacy, unstable internet connectivity, and limited access to devices. Additionally, virtual settings reduce the impact of oral arguments and make it difficult to read judges’ responses. Confidential client communication and document handling also become complex in digital environments.
6. What is the future of virtual courts in India?
A hybrid model combining physical and virtual formats is the likely future. Under the E-Courts Phase III Project, the judiciary aims to digitize services, implement virtual trial options selectively, and improve infrastructure. The model will depend on the nature of the case—routine hearings may go online, while trials requiring witness testimony may remain physical.
