BENGALURU, April 8 : Karnataka High Court on Monday made history in the legal system when speech and hearing-impaired advocate made submissions through a certified sign language interpreter.
The court, recognising the importance of this moment, appreciated Sarah’s efforts, with Justice M Nagaprasanna noting the significance of her contributions.
He said, “Counsel for the petitioner’s wife, Sarah Sunny had made elaborate submissions, through a sign language interpreter and the submission made by Sarah Sunny needs to be appreciated and the appreciation is placed on record though it is through the sign language interpreter.”
Additional Solicitor General Arvind Kamath commended the court’s decision, stating that this event marked a historic moment for the Karnataka High Court, making it the first high court to hear a speech and hearing-impaired advocate through an interpreter.
“Karnataka High Court will go down in history as the first high court to have heard a hearing and speech advocate through an interpreter. I understand that she has appeared before the Chief Justice of India, but in terms of the high court this will be the first,” the ASG said.
The background of the case involves advocate Sarah representing a complainant in a matter related to sections 498(A), 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband, who had a lookout circular issued against him.
The complainant has requested the arrest of her husband, who left India after obtaining permission from the Magistrate court to travel to Scotland. This permission was granted based on an application filed seeking the revocation of the lookout circular (LOC) issued against him. She sought his arrest upon his return to India and be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate.
The accused husband has petitioned the court to quash the case against him and obtain an interim order to stay the lookout circular.
In support of his petition, the husband claimed to be an employee at the Blackrock, Edinburgh Branch, Scotland. He contended that failure to return to Scotland would result in the loss of his employment.
Additionally, he stated that he holds Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) status and citizenship in the United Kingdom.
The court took note of the issues raised, including the procedure for dealing with lookout circulars and the involvement of various authorities in the process. It granted time for the petitioner’s husband to file objections and directed that no coercive steps be taken against certain family members named in the complaint until the investigation is complete.
In addition, the court also acknowledged an application filed by the Union of India, which challenged the order that recalled the lookout circular issued against the husband. The memorandum accompanying this application contended that the lookout circular (LOC) is an executive order, and it raises concerns about the authority of magistrates to pass orders quashing or recalling LOCs and permitting travel.
The Additional Solicitor General argued that the situation described has resulted in chaos, where magistrates are entertaining executive orders without involving key parties such as the Bureau of Immigration or the originator of the executive order.
He also pointed out that in such cases, the state public prosecutor is heard, and orders are passed without the necessary parties being involved.
The court granted time to the counsel representing the petitioner’s husband to file objections to the application raised by the Union of India, allowing his legal team the opportunity to respond to the concerns raised in the application.
Moreover, the court issued a directive regarding the investigation, stating that if the investigation is not completed under the guise of an ongoing investigation, no coercive steps should be taken against the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the wife, who has been named in the complaint. However, they are directed to cooperate with the investigation process.
The matter is scheduled for further hearing on April 19, with Advocate K Ravindranath and Advocate Sarah representing the petitioners, and ASG Arvind Kamath along with DSG Shanthi Bhushan H representing the respondents. (UNI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
