Some time in the past Union Ministry of Law and Justice, after considering all aspects, decided in 2007 that e-Courts Mission Mode be introduced in the courts of the country to overcome the difficult issue of huge pendency and also the long delays in meting out justice. Consequently, comprehensive scheme was formulated now known as e-Courts Mission Mode. The purpose was to introduce the latest skills of information and communication technology into the judicial system of the country and especially in handling the under trial and jailed cases.
For the implementation of the e-Courts Mission Project, video conferencing equipments for 14 jails-Central Jails of Kot Bhalwal and Srinagar, district jails of Jammu, Kishtwar, Kathua, Poonch, Rajouri, Udhampur, Anantnag, Baramulla, Kupwara, Leh and sub-jails of Hiranagar and Reasi and 12 District Court Complexes namely Jammu, Kathua, Rajouri, Reasi, Kishtwar, Udhampur, Poonch, Srinagar, Anantnag, Kupwara, Baramulla and Leh were provided during February 2015 and October 2015. However, the report of the CAG on the performance of these devices is dismal and depressing. The report says that only five out of 48 identified courts were found exclusively computerized during the audit while as in 25 courts filing of cases was found exclusively manual and in 18 courts filing of cases was found partially computerized. None of these 48 courts were found computerized vis-à-vis caveat checking of cases, issue of check slips, preparation of summons, preparation of court diaries, warrants and notice generation, preparation of decree and delivery of decree.
This dismal performance simply means that the scheme has failed in our State. This is despite the equipment necessary for the success of the scheme was also provided. However, the reasons given by the High Court for allowing the e-Courts Mission Mode remaining in limbo is that firstly the technical staff that would handle the files and documents in a proper manner left half way and the work remained incomplete. The second and most important reason for non implementation is either internet facilities were not available at the designated courts or there was recurrent electric power failure that often caused disruption in feeding the material to the computers.
The significant component of the e-Courts as proposed in the original scheme was of video-conferencing. If it had been implemented in right earnest and with seriousness, the expenditure and time both would have been saved and a new enthusiasm for working expeditiously would have shaped. The courts lack expert manpower to handle the gadgets. The results that we find today are not encouraging and these should become the catalyst for the policy planners to reconsider the entire scheme with the single important objective of how it can be made effective. That internet connection is not available at some places or is not tidy and effective is very true. It means that the Government has to ensure that internet is provided on uninterrupted level and then only can e-Courts fulfill the mission, We already know that hundreds of complaints are coming in day in and day out about inefficiency and slackness in the net provided which is BSNL by and large in our State. Therefore, first of all the BSNL has to be alerted about its responsibility of ensuring uninterrupted connectivity so that data can be uploaded and the e-Court Mode scheme made to work successfully. Secondly, how can the Courts show good and satisfactory progress unless these are provided sufficient technical manpower which will work round the clock? We do not know if contractual system can be viable for delivering the goods.
In final analysis, it is an excellent scheme and will immensely reduce pendency. It will give a new shape to the working culture of the judiciary and its subsidiaries. But the scheme being a technical one has to be implemented and popularized by the Information and communication technological staff.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel