CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has observed that courts have to integrate technology into the procedure for conducting proceedings, while overturning an order of a special court for CBI cases which refused to allow an octogenarian suffering from Parkinson’s disease to appear through video-conference for framing of charges.
Justice N Seshasayee made the remarks while allowing a petition filed by Jacob, who is the tenth accused in a corruption case registered by CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act against Supreme Chemiplast Private Limited in 2007, in connection with defrauding the Punjab and Sind bank by availing credit facilities.
He moved the high court challenging the order of the XI Additional Special Court for CBI Cases, Chennai, refusing to allow him appear through video-conference owing to his ailments.
The judge noted that framing of charges is the responsibility of the court, and the litigant is willing to submit to it. It is imperative life is made least inconvenient to litigants; and merely because someone faces criminal accusation and is required to defend the charge, it does not necessarily imply he has to surrender all his comforts and convenience to participate in trial.
“Once the investigation is over and the final report is taken on record by the court concerned, then it becomes the responsibility of the court to frame charges. Therefore, wherever possible the court may have to resort to technology to make life less cumbersome and most convenient for all concerned,” he stated in a recent order.
Referring to the contention of the counsel for the petitioner on section 355 of BNSS, 2023, exempting personal appearance, the judge said even though the trial court has taken cognisance prior to enacting BNSS, inasmuch as the explanation to the section only shows the “need to incorporate and integrate technology into procedure.”
According to the petitioner, the CBI registered the case in 2007 and chargesheet was filed in 2016. Based on some statements, he was suo motu included in the case by the special court. The framing of charges in the case is yet to be completed.