The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hold a meeting of the Supreme Court Bar Association and a committee of apex court judges, following protests from the Bar over the hybrid format of hearing, which commenced from March 15.
Under the hybrid format, lawyers have the option of appearing through the virtual mode or be physically present in the court hall. The Bar wants physical hearings to resume.
The apex court registry had recently issued standard operating procedure with regard to the hybrid hearing that formally commenced from March 15, but had a very poor response.
The SCBA, led by its president, moved the top court questioning the recent decision of the Supreme Court to conduct the hybrid hearing – a decision which the association said was unilaterally taken by the top court on the administrative side without proper consultation and consent of the Bar.
SCBA president and senior advocate Vikas Singh appearing before a bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R. Subhash Reddy argued that most members of the Bar are opposed to the virtual format or hybdrid hearing and wanted restoration of the physical hearing.
“Either you follow protocol by the government or follow the court’s protocol. Government permits opening of auditoriums and other public places and the ones who want virtual hearing have taken flights to Goa. If you can take a flight for two hours you can’t argue here?” Singh said.
His reference was to several senior lawyers arguing from London, Goa, Mumbai and other places in different courts simultaneously, whereas many other not so privileged lawyers are facing even starvation.
However, Justice Kaul said Singh’s argument that the SCBA and representatives of the Bar were not consulted before issuing the SoP on hybrid hearing was incorrect.
The bench said it was fact that representatives of the Bar had attended a meeting prior to the decision to hold hybrid hearing.
“I have minutes of meetings where representatives of the Bar were present. You said no one was consulted. I find it odd that you say there was no consultation,” Justice Kaul said.
Singh submitted that pursuant to the last notification issued by the Disaster Management Authority, auditoriums and several other public places were opened.
As such, the court must either follow the DMA rules or frame its own rules after proper consultation with the Bar.
“Judges do not even know, what the stand of the Bar, it was not heard while formulating the hybrid hearing SOP... judges pass through sterile route and sit behind glass and you are protected. But for us , we should make rules.
“The CJI had also told me how reverse cameras can be put up in courts to reflect physical arguments to the counsels who appear virtually. Today there are 200 VC (virtual court) hearings and 20 physical. How does one lawyer manage both? We want full physical hearing as an association.
“The unsuccessful lawyers are at a disadvantage. My convenience cannot be taken as the yardstick. Filing of matters, have gone below 20 to 25 percent. Some lawyers have left profession and are struggling, ” Singh said.
Justice Subhash Reddy agreed saying: “We know the problems of the young lawyers but there needs to be balance. Did you see the graph of Covid-19 cases in newspaper today?” he asked.
Singh responded saying Delhi has 0.5 percent positivity rate. “Most of the positive cases are due to people not wearing masks and we will ensure we will wear masks and also sanitize hands,” he said.
The court later adjourned the hearing saying a meeting of the judges’ committee and the Bar representatives would be conducted to thrash out the issue.
